Abstract
Two of the steps in Mr Searle’s derivation1 are from:
-
(3)
Jones placed himself under (undertook) an obligation to pay Smith five dollars, to:
-
(4)
Jones is under an obligation to pay Smith five dollars, and from that to:
-
(5)
Jones ought to pay Smith five dollars.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Copyright information
© 1969 Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Thomson, J., Thomson, J. (1969). How not to derive ‘ought’ from ‘is’. In: Hudson, W.D. (eds) The Is-Ought Question. Controversies in Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-15336-7_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-15336-7_17
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-10597-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-15336-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)