Abstract
(I) In his ‘Hume on Is and Ought’ …. Mr Geoffrey Hunter discusses the now famous passage on is and ought (Treatise, m. i. I). (It is perhaps worth underlining, parenthetically, that now. For in Prin- cipia Ethic a Moore did not even mention the passage; indeed, there is no reference at all to Hume in the Index.) Hunter challenges what he calls ‘the Brief Guide interpretation’ (BGI). This consists in asserting that Hume here was ‘claiming or implying that propositions about what men ought to do are radically different from purely factual propositions, and that they cannot ever be entailed by any purely factual propositions’.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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
Flew, A. (1969). On the interpretation of Hume. 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_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-15336-7_5
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)