It is widely agreed that we can and should defer to experts in fields such as the natural sciences. The case is different for morality. Here, many oppose of deference on the grounds that if we defer, we cannot gain knowledge, or fall short of showing an appropriate epistemic or affectional response. In my opinion, however, this is based on a misconception of moral testimony as simple or single-sentence testimony and can be refuted if one conceives of it as narrative testimony – which makes sense because those who speak about morality often have (personal) moral stories to tell.