Is-Ought Dichotomy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Sir Andrew (talk | contribs) (Created) |
Sir Andrew (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{stub}} | {{stub}} | ||
'''The Is-Ought Dichotomy''' is considered a false dichotomy because it contradicts the [[Axioms|axiom]] of [[Identity]] and its corollary [[Causality]]. By the axiom and its corollary, what an existent '''''is''''' determines what it '''''ought''''' to do. | '''The Is-Ought Dichotomy''' is considered a false [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] dichotomy because it contradicts the [[Axioms|axiom]] of [[Identity]] and its corollary [[Causality]]. By the axiom and its corollary, what an existent '''''is''''' determines what it '''''ought''''' to do. | ||
==Further Reading== | ==Further Reading== | ||
*[http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/is-ought_dichotomy.html "Is-Ought Dichotomy" at the Ayn Rand Lexicon] | *[http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/is-ought_dichotomy.html "Is-Ought Dichotomy" at the Ayn Rand Lexicon] | ||
Revision as of 23:50, 27 August 2010
The Is-Ought Dichotomy is considered a false metaphysical dichotomy because it contradicts the axiom of Identity and its corollary Causality. By the axiom and its corollary, what an existent is determines what it ought to do.