I will begin by arguing that the most plausible version of ‘ought implies can’ is not the following: if one ought to do something, then one can do it right then. The most plausible version is rather one that we might call ‘ought implies could have’. This says instead, roughly, that if one ought to do something, then one could have done it. There are various things this might mean, though. After offering precise versions of the obvious candidates, I will argue that none of them will accommodate everything we want from an ‘ought implies can’ principle.

Philosophy Seminar Series
Date: Thursday, 13 Aug 2015
Time: 3pm – 5pm
Venue: AS3 #05-23
Speaker: King Alexandra, SUNY Buffalo
Moderator: Dr. Qu Hsueh Ming

About the Speaker:

Alex King is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at SUNY Buffalo and currently visiting ANU as a Research Associate in the School of Philosophy. She works on the ‘ought implies can’ debate in ethics and metaethics, as well as on practical reason and aesthetics.