Andrew D. Bassford

Doctoral Research Fellow



Contact

Andrew D. Bassford

Doctoral Research Fellow


Curriculum vitae


[email protected]


Philosophy Department

University of Texas at Austin

2210 Speedway, Stop C3500
Austin, Texas 78712-1737



Andrew D. Bassford

Doctoral Research Fellow


[email protected]


Philosophy Department

University of Texas at Austin

2210 Speedway, Stop C3500
Austin, Texas 78712-1737



Ought Implies Can or Could Have


Journal article


A. D. Bassford
Review of Metaphysics, vol. 75(4), 2022, pp. 779-807

Link
Cite

Cite

APA   Click to copy
Bassford, A. D. (2022). Ought Implies Can or Could Have. Review of Metaphysics, 75(4), 779–807.


Chicago/Turabian   Click to copy
Bassford, A. D. “Ought Implies Can or Could Have.” Review of Metaphysics 75, no. 4 (2022): 779–807.


MLA   Click to copy
Bassford, A. D. “Ought Implies Can or Could Have.” Review of Metaphysics, vol. 75, no. 4, 2022, pp. 779–807.


BibTeX   Click to copy

@article{a2022a,
  title = {Ought Implies Can or Could Have},
  year = {2022},
  issue = {4},
  journal = {Review of Metaphysics},
  pages = {779-807},
  volume = {75},
  author = {Bassford, A. D.}
}

Abstract: The moral principle that Ought Implies Can (“OIC”) is often assumed without argument in normative discourse. Is this assumption defensible? Some would argue that it is not, as there are many purported counterexamples against it in the literature. However, OIC is not so much a single principle as rather a family of them. In this paper, I will argue that, while not every OIC-type principle is defensible, at least one of them may be. I defend the cognate moral principle that Ought Implies Can or Could Have (“OICCH”). I first show that it is able to circumvent the traditional counterexamples to OIC. And then I show that OICCH is even more plausible than some of the best alternative OIC-type principles to date. The upshot of this paper is that those who find OIC compelling should consider accepting OICCH instead.
Key Words: ought implies can; moral normativity; deontological metaethics; deontic logic 




Follow this website


You need to create an Owlstown account to follow this website.


Sign up

Already an Owlstown member?

Log in