The is-ought problem

Definition

The is-ought problem is a philosophical issue that arises from the distinction between descriptive statements about what is (facts) and prescriptive statements about what ought to be (values). It highlights the difficulty in deriving moral conclusions from purely factual premises, suggesting that one cannot simply infer ethical obligations from natural facts without additional normative reasoning.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The is-ought problem was articulated by David Hume in the 18th century, where he pointed out the challenge of moving from descriptions of the world to normative ethical claims.
2. This problem raises significant implications for ethical theories, particularly for naturalistic ethics, which try to ground moral principles in empirical observations.
3. Philosophers have debated how to bridge the gap between factual premises and moral conclusions, with various approaches including intuitionism and rationalism.
4. Understanding the is-ought problem is crucial for evaluating arguments in moral philosophy, as it questions whether our ethical beliefs can be justified based on empirical evidence alone.
5. The is-ought problem is often seen as a challenge for evolutionary ethics, which attempts to explain moral behavior through evolutionary processes without adequately addressing how these behaviors translate into moral imperatives.

Review Questions

• How does the is-ought problem challenge naturalistic approaches to ethics?
  • The is-ought problem challenges naturalistic approaches by questioning their ability to derive moral norms directly from empirical observations of human behavior or natural phenomena. Naturalism often relies on factual claims about human nature or society to inform ethical decisions, but Hume's insight indicates that such claims do not inherently justify any particular moral stance. This creates a tension where naturalists must find a way to justify their ethical prescriptions beyond mere facts.
• In what ways have philosophers attempted to address the gap identified by the is-ought problem?
  • Philosophers have approached the gap identified by the is-ought problem through various frameworks. Some advocate for intuitionism, which posits that moral truths are self-evident and can be known through intuition. Others suggest rationalism, which emphasizes logical reasoning as a means to derive ethical norms. Additionally, some thinkers explore emotivism or constructivist approaches, arguing that moral statements express emotions or are constructed through social agreements rather than being derived from factual states.
• Evaluate the significance of the is-ought problem in contemporary ethical discussions, particularly regarding its implications for moral realism and anti-realism.
  • The significance of the is-ought problem in contemporary ethical discussions lies in its impact on debates surrounding moral realism and anti-realism. Moral realists argue that there are objective moral truths that exist independently of human opinions, while anti-realists contend that moral values are subjective constructs. The is-ought problem challenges realists by questioning how objective moral truths can be derived from empirical data without additional normative frameworks. This ongoing discourse influences how ethicists approach the justification of moral principles and whether they can rely on scientific findings alone to inform ethical debates.

Related terms

Naturalism: A philosophical viewpoint asserting that everything arises from natural properties and causes, and that supernatural or spiritual explanations are excluded or discounted.

Hume's Law: A principle proposed by philosopher David Hume, stating that one cannot derive an 'ought' from an 'is', emphasizing the gap between factual statements and moral judgments.

Meta-ethics: A branch of ethics that explores the nature, meaning, and foundations of moral values and judgments, often addressing questions about how moral truths can be known.