A Neglected Reply to Prior’s Dilemma

In James Maclaurin (ed.), Rationis Defensor (2012)
Abstract
This paper offers a novel reply to Prior’s dilemma (for the Is/Ought principle), advocating a so-called Weak Kleene framework motivated by two not uncommon thoughts in the debate, namely, that ought statements are identified as those that use ‘ought’, and that ought statements are ‘funny’ in ways that is statements aren’t (e.g., perhaps sometimes being ‘gappy’ with respect to truth and falsity).
Keywords Prior's Dilemma  Is/Ought
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index Translate to english
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 10,273
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Julian Fink (2007). Is the Right Prior to the Good? South African Journal of Philosophy 26 (2):143-149.
Colin Grant (2004). The Altruists' Dilemma. Business Ethics Quarterly 14 (2):315-328.
Sheila Lintott (2002). When Artists Fail: A Reply to Trivedi. British Journal of Aesthetics 42 (1):64-72.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2012-06-19

Total downloads

15 ( #101,579 of 1,096,280 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

2 ( #130,630 of 1,096,280 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.