Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

'Is' and 'Ought' in Context: MacIntyre's Mistake

'Is' and 'Ought' in Context: MacIntyre's Mistake Maclntyre's Mistake1 'Is* and Ought' in Context: (1)What drives Hume to the conclusion that morality must be understood in terms of, explained and justified by reference to, the place of the passions and desires in human life is his initial assumption that either morality is the work of reason or it is the work of the passions and his own apparently conclusive arguments that it cannot be the work of reason. (2)At the same time as they [Diderot, Hume, Kierkegaard and Kant] agree largely on the character of morality, they agree also upon what a rational justification ofmorality would have to be. Its key premises would characterise some feature or features of human nature; and the rules of morality would then be explained and justified as being those rules which a being possessing just such a nature could be expected to accept. (3)[Hume] treats this ground for the justification of the rules of property and this explanation ofthem as holding for all times and places, prosperous as well as unprosperous, ever since the rules were first artificially contrived. (4)It is just such reasoning which Hume advanced both to explain and to justify the rules of justice, conceived as http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Hume Studies Hume Society

'Is' and 'Ought' in Context: MacIntyre's Mistake

Hume Studies , Volume 18 (1) – Jan 26, 1992

Loading next page...
 
/lp/hume-society/is-and-ought-in-context-macintyre-s-mistake-xxgTs5L1Q3
Publisher
Hume Society
Copyright
Copyright © Hume Society
ISSN
1947-9921
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Maclntyre's Mistake1 'Is* and Ought' in Context: (1)What drives Hume to the conclusion that morality must be understood in terms of, explained and justified by reference to, the place of the passions and desires in human life is his initial assumption that either morality is the work of reason or it is the work of the passions and his own apparently conclusive arguments that it cannot be the work of reason. (2)At the same time as they [Diderot, Hume, Kierkegaard and Kant] agree largely on the character of morality, they agree also upon what a rational justification ofmorality would have to be. Its key premises would characterise some feature or features of human nature; and the rules of morality would then be explained and justified as being those rules which a being possessing just such a nature could be expected to accept. (3)[Hume] treats this ground for the justification of the rules of property and this explanation ofthem as holding for all times and places, prosperous as well as unprosperous, ever since the rules were first artificially contrived. (4)It is just such reasoning which Hume advanced both to explain and to justify the rules of justice, conceived as

Journal

Hume StudiesHume Society

Published: Jan 26, 1992

There are no references for this article.