Oughts and ends

58Citations
Citations of this article
36Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This paper advances a reductive semantics for 'ought' and a naturalistic theory of normativity. It gives a unified analysis of predictive, instrumental, and categorical uses of 'ought': the predictive 'ought' is basic, and is interpreted in terms of probability. Instrumental 'oughts' are analyzed as predictive 'oughts' occurring under an 'in order that' modifer (the end-relational theory). The theory is then extended to categorical uses of 'ought': it is argued that they are special rhetorical uses of the instrumental 'ought'. Plausible conversational principles explain how this end-relational 'ought' can perform the expressive functions of the moral 'ought'. The notion of an 'ought-simpliciter' is also discussed. © 2008 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Finlay, S. (2009). Oughts and ends. Philosophical Studies, 143(3), 315–340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-008-9202-8

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free