305 followers
Revisiting Searle on Deriving "Ought" from "Is" https://t.co/XonPNAgRfX
Revisiting Searle on Deriving "Ought" from "Is"
Overview of attention for book
Table of Contents
-
Altmetric BadgeBook Overview
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 1 How to Derive “Ought” from “Is” Revisited
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 2 An Interview with John R. Searle
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 3 Is and Ought: Where Does the Problem Lie?
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 4 Searlean “Is” and “Ought” Revisited
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 5 Some Remarks on Searle’s View on the Logic of Practical Reasoning
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 6 On the Regulative Functions of Constitutive Rules
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 7 Existence as a Source of Normativity: An Alternative to Searle’s View
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 8 How to Derive Is from Ought
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 9 Searle vs. Conte on Constitutive Rules
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 10 “Ought” Is Spoken in Many Ways
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 11 Constitutive Rules, Criteria of Validity, and Law
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 12 Can Constitutive Rules Bridge the Gap Between Is- and Ought-Statements?
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 13 Searle and Conte on Deriving Ought from Is
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 14 Why Moral Norms Cannot Be Reduced to Facts: On a Trilemma in Derivations of Moral “Ought” from “Is”
-
Altmetric BadgeChapter 15 On Searle’s Derivation and Its Relation to Constitutive Rules: A Social Scientist’s Perspective