Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Human Affairs

Postdisciplinary Humanities & Social Sciences Quarterly

Editor-in-Chief: Višnovský, Emil

Ed. by Bianchi, Gabriel / Hrubec, Marek / Tartaglia, James

CiteScore 2016: 0.33

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.172
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.415

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 21, Issue 3


The Is-Ought Problem, the Open Question Argument, and the new science of morality

Radim Bělohrad
Published Online: 2011-09-22 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s13374-011-0027-3


The article deals with a recent attack by Sam Harris on two famous arguments that purport to establish a gap between factual and evaluative statements—Hume’s Is-Ought Problem and Moore’s Open Question Argument. I present the arguments, analyze the relationship between them and critically assess Harris’ attempt to refute them. I conclude that Harris’ attempt fails.

Keywords: is-ought; open question argument; Harris; science; a priori

  • [1] Greene, J. (2002). The Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Truth about Morality and What To Do about It. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University. Google Scholar

  • [2] Haidt, J. (2001). The Emotional Dog and its Rational Tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment. Psychological Review 108(4), 814–834. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.814CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [3] Harris, S. (2010). The Moral Landscape. How Science Can Determine Human Values. New York: Free Press. Google Scholar

  • [4] Harris, S. (2004). Letter to a Christian Nation. Vintage Books. Google Scholar

  • [5] Hume, D. (2003). A Treatise of Human Nature. Available at http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/4705 [24.6.2011]. Google Scholar

  • [6] Leopold, A. (2005). The Land Ethic. In Olen, J., Van Camp, J. C., Barry, V. (Eds.). Applying Ethics. 8th edition. Wadsworth, pp. 501–510. Google Scholar

  • [7] Moore, G. E., Baldwin, T. (1993). Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar

  • [8] Parfit, D. (1986). Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar

  • [9] The Science Network. Can Science Tell Us Right from Wrong? The Great Debate Panel. Available at http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/the-great-debate/the-great-debate-panel-1 [24.6.2011]. Google Scholar

  • [10] Stanovisko pracovníků Centra pro výzkum biodiverzity k otázce regulace kůrovcové gradace v Šumavském národním parku. Available at http://www.avcr.cz/miranda2/export/sitesavcr/data.avcr.cz/sys/galerie-download/kurovec.pdf. [24.6.2011]. Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2011-09-22

Published in Print: 2011-09-01

Citation Information: Human Affairs, Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages 262–271, ISSN (Online) 1337-401X, ISSN (Print) 1210-3055, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s13374-011-0027-3.

Export Citation

© 2011 Institute for Research in Social Communication, Slovak Academy of Sciences. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in