Ought and Ought not
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8103400 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Richard Robinson (0000-0001-9737-3812), Richard M Robinson (0000-0002-9398-8139, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1971 |
| Volume | 46 |
| Issue | 177 |
| Pages | 193-202 |
| Publication date | 1971-07-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-8191 • E-ISSN: 1469-817X |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0031819100018969 |
| OpenAlex | W2025703528 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
The word ought is often used to express moral judgments. It is used to express moral laws, as in “We ought to honour our parents”; and it is used to express singular moral judgments, as in “You ought not to have spoken to your mother like that”". Some singular moral judgments are clearly deductions from some moral law, as is “You ought not to have spoken to your mother like that”. Others, however, are not clearly so, e.g. “You ought not to have done that”. Where both the agent and the action are indicated merely by a contextual reference, no underlying moral law is suggested by the words alone. Even when the singular judgment characterizes both the agent and the action, as “You, being a strong man, ought to have gone to his aid”, it may still be quite obscure what, if any, moral law implies this judgment. Clearly there is no moral law that “Every strong man ought always to go to everybody's aid
Action (physics · Epistemology · Honour · Moral authority · Moral reasoning · Political science · Sociology · Law in Society and Culture · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Psychology · Law · Philosophy
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,21 |
| Citation span | 2002 - 2024 (23) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |