Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?

Click here to configure this browser for off-campus access.

  1. James E. Tomberlin (1972). The is-Ought Dichotomy: A Modest Proposal. Journal of Value Inquiry 6 (1).
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation | Scholar | At my library
    34 downloads  |  Added to index: 2009-01-28  |  Mark as duplicate  |  Remove from index  |  Revision history
    Bookmark and Share
Similar books and articles
  • Nicholas Denyer (2000). Traffic Lights: A Modest Proposal. Mind 109:45 - 46.
    No categories
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation  | Other links: jstor.org   | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
  • Jan Narveson (1985). Getting on the Road to Peace: A Modest Proposal. Ethics 95 (3):589-605.
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation  | Other links: jstor.org journals.uchicago.edu dx.doi.org   | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
  • Henry E. Kyburg Jr (1961). A Modest Proposal Concerning Simplicity. Philosophical Review 70 (3):390-395.
    No categories
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation  | Other links: jstor.org   | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
  • Edward Regis Jr (1974). A Modest Linguistic Proposal. The New Scholasticism 48 (2):247-250.
    No categories
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
  • S. C. Patten (1979). Scepticism and the Second Analogy: A Modest Proposal. Dialogue 18 (01):27-40.
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation  | Other links: dx.doi.org   | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
  • John Hymers (1999). Not a Modest Proposal. Ethical Perspectives 6 (2):126-138.
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation  | Other links: dx.doi.org   | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
  • Arthur Madigan (1984). Metaphysics E 3: A Modest Proposal. Phronesis 29 (2):123-136.
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation  | Other links: jstor.org dx.doi.org   | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
  • Michael B. Green (1979). Harris's Modest Proposal. Philosophy 54 (209):400 - 406.
    No categories
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation  | Other links: jstor.org dx.doi.org   | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
  • Arthur Madigan (1984). "Metaphysics" E 3: A Modest Proposal. Phronesis 29 (2):123 - 136.
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation  | Other links: openurl.ingenta.com jstor.org dx.doi.org   | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
  • H. D. Rankin (1968). A Modest Proposal About the "Republic". Apeiron 2 (2):20 - 22.
    No categories
    Reading list   |  Discuss  |  Edit  |  Categorize  |  
     
    My bibliography  |
     
    Export citation | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
    • Discussion of James E. Tomberlin, The is-ought dichotomy: A modest proposal
    Back    All discussions     Start a new thread
    Order:
    		There  is 1 thread in this forum
    2009-09-17
    Discussion of James E. Tomberlin, The is-ought dichotomy: A modest proposalStatus of this paper?
    Joshua Smith

    San Francisco State University

    I stumbled across this paper and honestly am not sure what to think. Has anyone read this or seen reference to it? Or a response to its claims?

    I'm intrigued because it seems to neuter the is-ought dichotomy pretty convincingly. It'd be fantastic if others could weigh in on this.
    Latest replies:
    • Kris Rhodes, 2009-10-21 : I was puzzled by the last bit. He ends up saying the only defensible version of the no-ought-from-is principle is one th... (read more)
    Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/1677 Reply





    Applied ethicsEpistemologyHistory of Western PhilosophyMeta-ethicsMetaphysicsNormative ethics
    Philosophy of biologyPhilosophy of languagePhilosophy of mindPhilosophy of religionScience Logic and MathematicsMore ...
    Home | New books and articles | Bibliographies | Philosophy journals | Discussions | The Categorization Project | About PhilPapers | API | Contact us

    Institute of Philosophy
    School of Advanced Study
    University of London     		Sponsored by the Joint Information Systems Committee as part of the
    Information Environment Programme     		Centre for Consciousness
    Research School of Social Sciences
    Australian National University
    This site uses Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions, clause 10 for details regarding the privacy implications).

    Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
    All rights reserved by PhilPapers Ltd
    Unit 11, 60 Great Russell St, London, WC1B 3BE, United Kingdom