Volume 112, Issue 4, April 2015
Daniel J. Singer
Pages 193-210
Mind the Is-Ought Gap
Cited by
- Tomáš Sobek. Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi. Pragmatismus bez metafyziky? 2021. [CrossRef]
- Neil Sinhababu. Erkenntnis. The Reliable Route from Nonmoral Evidence to Moral Conclusions 2022. [CrossRef]
- Aaron Wolf. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy. Ruling out solutions to Prior’s dilemma for Hume’s law 2020. [CrossRef]
- Melvin Chen. South African Journal of Philosophy. The is-ought gap and the substitution criterion 2021. [CrossRef]
- Samuele Chilovi, Daniel Wodak. Philosophical Studies. On the (in)significance of Hume’s Law 2022. [CrossRef]
- Kit Fine. Synthese. Truthmaking and the is–ought gap 2021. [CrossRef]
- Gillian Russell. Journal of Philosophical Logic. How to Prove Hume’s Law 2022. [CrossRef]
- Singa Behrens. Synthese. No normative free lunch: relevance and the autonomy of the normative domain 2021. [CrossRef]
- Norbert Gratzl, Edi Pavlović. Journal of Philosophical Logic. Is, Ought, and Cut 2023. [CrossRef]
- P.D. Magnus, Jon Mandle. Journal of Moral Philosophy. What Kind of Is-Ought Gap is There and What Kind Ought There Be? 2017. [CrossRef]
- Hsueh Qu. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly. Laying Down Hume's Law 2019. [CrossRef]
- Matthew Caulfield. Business Ethics 2019: 123. [CrossRef]
- Elliot Salinger. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. Expressivism and moral independence 2024. [CrossRef]