Hume's is/ought problem? (L3 - Is Ought Problem - Hume) video notes
Introduction to the Is-Ought Problem
The video tutorial addresses David Hume's Is-Ought Problem, also known as Hume's Law, Gap, or Guillotine.
The objective for students by the end of the lesson: to describe, understand, and apply Hume's Is-Ought Problem with specific examples related to its impact on:
Utilitarianism
Natural Moral Law
Hume’s Observations on Moral Arguments
Scottish Enlightenment philosopher David Hume analyzed moral arguments in his work "A Treatise of Human Nature."
Key observation: Many moral theorists begin their discussions by stating facts (what is the case) but then transition to normative claims (what ought to be).
Hume argued this transition constitutes a logical error.
Central claim: Just because something exists a certain way does not mean it ought to exist that way; this idea encapsulates Hume’s Is-Ought Problem.
The Gap Between Facts and Values
Hume asserts there is a significant logical gap between:
Descriptive statements (facts about the world)
Prescriptive statements (what we ought to do)
Example illustrating this point:
Stephen Law's aliens observe a mugging:
Facts observed: An object is taken from one human by another; the victim is angry; the thief flees.
Human companions add moral value: "What they saw was wrong."
Aliens may question where this concept of "wrongness" came from since it was not observable as a fact.
Conclusion: Wrongness embeds a value judgment rather than an observable fact.
Analysis of Logical Structure in Arguments
Hume illustrates the distinction between arguments presenting facts versus values:
Example of Valid Argument:
Premises consist of factual claims.
Logical conclusion follows from these premises.
Example of Invalid Argument:
Conclusion states a value, leading to an unsupported transition.
Example: "Stealing is illegal. Therefore, we ought not to steal."
Legal status (a fact) does not inherently imply moral obligation (an ought).
The Necessity of Additional Premises
To construct logical and valid arguments based on facts and derive a value:
An additional premise that provides moral justification must be included.
Example premise: "You ought to act legally."
The nature of this premise is inherently a value, indicating:
The conclusion (an ought) remains unsupported by just facts alone;
Value premises are necessary to bridge the is-ought gap.
The Illogicality of Everyday Arguments
Daily exchanges often employ the is-ought structure incorrectly:
Example: "There are people starving in the world; you should finish your Brussels sprouts!"
Logical Error: The hidden premise reflects a value (e.g., “You shouldn't waste food”) not inherently included in observable facts.
Hume's conclusion: Without acknowledging these hidden premises, the argument fails logically.
Tasks to Clarify Understanding
Students are encouraged to identify hidden premises in given arguments that use the is-ought structure.
Purpose: Distinguish between facts and values and comprehend Hume's assertion that values cannot emerge from pure facts alone.
Impact on Meta-Ethics and Moral Theories
Meta-ethical theories impacted by Hume's Is-Ought Problem include:
Naturalism: Claims moral truths can be based on observable facts.
Application to two notable theories:
Utilitarianism:
Proposes: "What is good is pleasure; what is bad is pain."
Grounds value judgments on a posteriori (observed) facts.
Hume critiques: Just because people pursue pleasure does not justify the claim that pleasure is inherently good.
Logical jump from fact to value is unsubstantiated.
Natural Moral Law:
Claims: Morally good actions align with fulfilling a god-given purpose (telos).
Position uses observable functions of human existence to derive moral obligations (e.g., procreation).
Hume counters: The existence of a function does not necessitate that it is morally obligatory to fulfill it.
Hume's Critiques of Theistic Responses
Possible response of Natural Moral Law theorists to Hume:
Divine command as justification for morality.
Is a God exists, and his commands dictate morality, allowing for the derivation of ought from is (e.g., fulfilling a divine function).
Issues with this response:
The existence of God is highly contentious and not universally accepted.
Even if a deity exists, how does this support deriving moral values from mere facts?
Example critique: If we claim reproduction is a divine function, we might uncover a hidden assumption: "We should fulfill such functions." This is a value, not a fact.
Reflection needed: What actual significance does the observation that something is God-given have if it does not allow for values to be derived from facts?
Conclusion: Engaging with Hume’s Thoughts
Students are invited to consider if they believe a way exists to bridge the gap between is and ought, and how Utilitarianism and Natural Moral Law could be defended against Hume's critiques.
The conversation invites further reflection and dialogue among peers regarding the foundations of moral values and their derivation from observable facts.