IS AND OUGHT AFTER DARWIN

نویسندگان

چکیده

برای دانلود باید عضویت طلایی داشته باشید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

' ought ' . ethical concepts . ' Is

Moral philosophy in the English-speaking world has been dominated during the present century by the controversy concerning the logical relationship between 'is' and 'ought'. These terms are, of course, to be understood in the present context as shorthand labels. By 'is' is meant any non-moral assertion, that is to say, any utterance which purports to be either true or false and which does not e...

متن کامل

On the genesis of "is" and "ought".

Human beings are confronted by how things, including themselves, work and how they ought to work. Human beings are also confronted, relatedly, by movement and language. The purpose of this note is to suggest an objective physical base within which these philosophic, psychological, and physiological properties of complex systems can be anchored.

متن کامل

There is no Darwin Conspiracy.indd

Roy Davies’s book The Darwin Conspiracy contends that Charles Darwin plagiarized his theory of evolution from Edward Blyth, Patrick Matthew, and especially Alfred Russell Wallace. In support of these contentions, Davies offers evidence of similar terminology between Darwin and Blyth/Matthew and mail delivery schedules that allowed Darwin to take advantage of Wallace’s letters about evolution. C...

متن کامل

‘ Ought ’ and ‘ Better ’

Sentences using ‘ought’ appear to have some kind of non-descriptive force (e.g. commending, guiding actions, committing the speaker), in which case it would seem that no ‘ought’ statement can follow logically from purely factual statements lacking such force. Yet from factual statements about slowness and liability to breakdown of alternative means of transport it seems possible validly to infe...

متن کامل

Ought, Agents, and Actions

According to a naïve view sometimes apparent in the writings of moral philosophers, ‘ought’ often expresses a relation between agents and actions – the relation that obtains between an agent and an action when that action is what that agent ought to do. It is not part of this naïve view that ‘ought’ always expresses this relation – on the contrary, adherents of the naïve view are happy to allow...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

ژورنال

عنوان ژورنال: The Modern Law Review

سال: 1977

ISSN: 0026-7961

DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.1977.tb02422.x