Main.IsOughtGap History
Hide minor edits - Show changes to output
Added lines 14-19:
* It is the case that p, It is a good thing that p.
* X is part of social convention, X is morally right / X should continue.
* Most people believe that X is wrong, X is wrong
* Everyone is doing X, X is morally acceptable.
* X is unnatural, X is wrong
Added lines 10-13:
!!The gap
No value / normative statement is entailed by any set of factual statements.
Added lines 10-15:
!!Hume
Hume (1739) ''A Treatise of Human Nature''. Book III, part I, section I.
@@@In every system of morality, which I have hitherto met with, I have always remark'd, that the author proceeds for some time in the ordinary ways of reasoning, and establishes the being of a God, or makes observations concerning human affairs; when all of a sudden I am surpriz'd to find, that instead of the usual copulations of propositions, is, and is not, I meet with no proposition that is not connected with an ought, or an ought not. This change is imperceptible; but is however, of the last consequence. For as this ought, or ought not, expresses some new relation or affirmation, 'tis necessary that it shou'd be observ'd and explain'd; and at the same time that a reason should be given; for what seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others, which are entirely different from it.@@@
Changed lines 1-2 from:
!!!Bridging the is-ought gap
to:
!The Is-Ought Gap
!!Readings
* Prior (1960) "The Auonomy of Ethics" ''Australasian Journal of Philosophy''.
* Geach (1977) "Against the Logic of 'Ought'" ''Philosophy''
* Geach (1982) "Moral Autonomy still Refuted" ''Philosophy''.
* Karmo (1988) "Some Valid (but no sound) Arguments Trivially Span the 'Is'-'Ought' Gap" in ''Mind'' Vol. XCVII, pp.252-257.
!!Bridging the is-ought gap
Deleted lines 18-24:
!Readings
* Prior (1960) "The Auonomy of Ethics" ''Australasian Journal of Philosophy''.
* Geach (1977) "Against the Logic of 'Ought'" ''Philosophy''
* Geach (1982) "Moral Autonomy still Refuted" ''Philosophy''.
* Karmo (1988) "Some Valid (but no sound) Arguments Trivially Span the 'Is'-'Ought' Gap" in ''Mind'' Vol. XCVII, pp.252-257.
Changed lines 7-9 from:
* "All As are Bs" entail "As ought to do what Bs ought to do." which is arguably normative.
to:
* "All As are Bs" entails "As ought to do what Bs ought to do." which is arguably normative.
Added lines 1-17:
!!!Bridging the is-ought gap
Examples from Geach and Prior. Let "P" be a normative statement.
* P entailed by "Everything that A says is true.", "A says that P."
* If "P or Q" is normative, then a factual statement Q can entail "P or Q". If "P or Q" is not normative, then ~Q, P or Q entails P.
* "All As are Bs" entail "As ought to do what Bs ought to do." which is arguably normative.
!Readings
* Prior (1960) "The Auonomy of Ethics" ''Australasian Journal of Philosophy''.
* Geach (1977) "Against the Logic of 'Ought'" ''Philosophy''
* Geach (1982) "Moral Autonomy still Refuted" ''Philosophy''.
* Karmo (1988) "Some Valid (but no sound) Arguments Trivially Span the 'Is'-'Ought' Gap" in ''Mind'' Vol. XCVII, pp.252-257.
[[Category.Philosophy]]