Premium
Hume and Facts, Logic and Values: A Comment on Cord's Argument
Author(s) -
Stoddard William H.
Publication year - 1982
Publication title -
american journal of economics and sociology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.199
H-Index - 38
eISSN - 1536-7150
pISSN - 0002-9246
DOI - 10.1111/j.1536-7150.1982.tb03177.x
Subject(s) - argument (complex analysis) , premise , obligation , philosophy , action (physics) , epistemology , natural (archaeology) , moral obligation , law and economics , law , sociology , political science , history , medicine , physics , archaeology , quantum mechanics
A bstract . Steven B. Cord argues for a moral standard based ultimately on the obligation to treat things as what they are. However, this makes morally good behavior impossible for anyone who does not know what something is. Since ought implies can, a principle relied on by Cord in his derivation of natural rights from his ultimate premise, and since no human being is omniscient. Cord's argument is invalid. Further, it runs directly counter to intuitively based moral judgments about right action under conditions of uncertain knowledge.