Ought, Can, and Presupposition: A Reply to Kurthy and Lawford-Smith

Methode 4 (6):250-256 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I report the results of a follow-up study, designed to address concerns raised by Kurthy and Lawford-Smith in response to my original study on intuitions about moral obligation (ought) and ability (can). Like the results of the original study, the results of the follow-up study do not support the hypothesis that OIC is intuitive. The results of both studies suggest that OIC is probably not a principle of ordinary moral cognition. As I have argued in my paper, I take this to mean that OIC can no longer be taken as axiomatic. It must be argued for without appealing to intuitions.

Author's Profile

Moti Mizrahi
Florida Institute of Technology

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-11-30

Downloads
446 (#51,448)

6 months
109 (#48,709)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?