No-ought-from-is

Definition

The no-ought-from-is principle asserts that one cannot derive moral prescriptions (what one ought to do) solely from descriptive statements (what is the case). This idea emphasizes the distinction between factual claims and normative claims, suggesting that ethical conclusions require additional premises beyond mere observations of the world. Understanding this concept is essential in discussions about subjectivism and moral skepticism, as it highlights the challenges of grounding moral beliefs in empirical facts.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The no-ought-from-is principle is closely associated with David Hume's work, particularly his arguments in 'A Treatise of Human Nature'.
2. This principle raises critical questions for ethical theories that attempt to base moral obligations solely on empirical observations.
3. In discussions of subjectivism, this principle supports the idea that moral judgments are influenced by personal feelings rather than objective truths.
4. Moral skepticism often utilizes the no-ought-from-is argument to challenge the validity of traditional ethical frameworks that claim to derive moral truths from factual statements.
5. Recognizing the no-ought-from-is distinction is crucial for developing a robust understanding of how ethical theories can justify their moral claims.

Review Questions

• How does the no-ought-from-is principle challenge traditional ethical theories?
  • The no-ought-from-is principle challenges traditional ethical theories by asserting that moral obligations cannot be derived purely from empirical observations or factual statements. This means that ethical frameworks relying on observable data to dictate what one ought to do face significant difficulties. For instance, if a theory suggests that because people often behave in a certain way, they ought to behave that way, the no-ought-from-is argument would question this leap from description to prescription.
• In what ways does the no-ought-from-is principle relate to subjectivism in ethics?
  • The no-ought-from-is principle relates to subjectivism by emphasizing the role of personal feelings and opinions in shaping moral judgments. Subjectivism posits that moral truths are not objective but are influenced by individual perspectives. By highlighting that one cannot derive moral imperatives from objective facts, the no-ought-from-is principle supports the view that ethical assertions may stem from subjective experiences rather than universal truths.
• Evaluate the implications of accepting the no-ought-from-is principle for moral reasoning and decision-making.
  • Accepting the no-ought-from-is principle has profound implications for moral reasoning and decision-making. It suggests that individuals must consider more than just factual information when determining what actions are morally appropriate. This could lead to a more nuanced understanding of ethics, where reasoning incorporates subjective experiences, cultural values, and philosophical arguments alongside empirical evidence. Consequently, moral discussions become richer but also more complex, as they require deliberation over both objective facts and subjective interpretations in forming ethical conclusions.

Related terms

Hume's Law: A principle proposed by philosopher David Hume, which states that one cannot derive an 'ought' from an 'is', highlighting the gap between descriptive and normative statements.

Moral Realism: The philosophical position asserting that there are objective moral facts that exist independently of individual beliefs or perceptions.

Moral Anti-Realism: The view that denies the existence of objective moral facts, often positing that moral claims are constructed rather than discovered.