This paper presents Hume's argument on whether one can derive a prescriptive statement from only descriptive premises.
Written in 2002; 807 words; 5 sources; MLA; $ 28.95
Paper Summary:
An analysis of the arguments either agreeing or disagreeing with Hume's stance on the question of 'ought' or 'is'. It shows how Hume's thoughts and writings have been interpreted by philosophers in several ways and discusses some of these interpretations.
From the Paper:
"Beginning with David Hume and ever since, much discussion in Ethics has centred around whether we can derive an "ought" from an "is". According to R. M. Hare, we cannot logically derive from indicative premises imperative conclusions; that is, we cannot derive a prescriptive statement from only descriptive premises. Such a move would be a variation of G. E. Moore's naturalistic fallacy which, in one of its forms, suggests that evaluative statements cannot be drawn from factual statements alone."
We have thousands of high-quality term papers, research papers, essays, book reports and dissertations on every topic. At AcaDemon, you can download those term papers to help you write yours! You can be sure that the term paper, essay, book report or research paper you download are top-quality, competitively priced and high-level work.
This Free Term Paper Abstract is a part of our Term Paper Library.Here you can purchase research papers, examples of essays, academic dissertations, articles, notes, analytical papers, book reports, stories and poems. We have thousands of persuasive, point-of-view, narrative, critical, compare and contrast and other types of essays in our Library. You can also find here Term papers on "David Hume: Ought vs. Is", Essays on "David Hume: Ought vs. Is", Research papers on "David Hume: Ought vs. Is", Student papers on "David Hume: Ought vs. Is", Book reports on "David Hume: Ought vs. Is", Dissertation on "David Hume: Ought vs. Is", Thesis on "David Hume: Ought vs. Is", Summary of paper on "David Hume: Ought vs. Is", Articles written on "David Hume: Ought vs. Is".