Institutions can be analyzed in terms of constitutive rules that forge intimate connections between statements about facts and norms. The purpose of this chapter is to investigate whether constitutive rules thereby bridge the gap between is-statements and ought-statements. I use the status account of constitutive rules that I have proposed elsewhere to explain that they are partly descriptive and partly normative, and I argue that they support the derivation of objective ought-statements, but only against the background of a normative principle. Hence, they do not as such bridge the Is-Ought gap.
CITATION STYLE
Hindriks, F. (2021). Can constitutive rules bridge the gap between is- and ought-statements? In Revisiting Searle on Deriving “Ought” from “Is” (pp. 211–238). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54116-3_12
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.