The syntactic structure of the deontic “ought” has been much debated in philosophy and linguistics. Schroeder argues that is syntactically ambiguous sense it can be associated with either a control or raising construction. He distinguishes between deliberative evaluative “ought”s while raising. However, if there “ought,” implies which word carries an external argument. Chrisman (Australas J Phi...

Most philosophers believe that a person can have an obligation only insofar as she is able to fulfil it, a principle generally referred to as "Ought Implies Can". Arguably, this principle reflects something basic about the ordinary concept of obligation. However, in a paper published recently in this journal, Wesley Buckwalter and John Turri presented evidence for the conclusion that ordinary p...

Abstract A thorny question surrounding the meaning of ought concerns a felt distinction between deontic uses that seem to evaluate state affairs versus those describe requirement or obligation perform an action, as in (A) and (B), respectively. There not be childhood death disease. (B) You keep promise. Various accounts have been offered explain contrast “agentive” “non-agentive” sentences. One...