Factualism, Normativism and the Bounds of Normativity

Dialogue 50 (2):347-365 (2011)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The paper argues that applications of the principle that “ought” implies “can” (OIC) depend on normative considerations even if the link between “ought” and “can” is logical in nature. Thus, we should reject a common, “factualist” conception of OIC and endorse weak “normativism”. Even if we use OIC as the rule ““cannot” therefore “not ought””, applying OIC is not a mere matter of facts and logic, as factualists claim, but often draws on “proto-ideals” of moral agency.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
BESFNA
Upload history
First archival date: 2011-08-06
Latest version: 6 (2013-07-10)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2011-06-14

Total views
686 ( #8,719 of 65,517 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
48 ( #17,641 of 65,517 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.