Thegosis
Sir, —Vernon Wilkinson (January 25) only strengthens suspicions of his having a Procrustean infatuation with Hume’s prestige, rather than any critical grasp of Hume’s philosophy. Hume claimed it was logically fallacious to deduce an “ought” (i.e., a prescriptive, moral rule or law) from an “is” (i.e., a descriptive, law of nature). In claiming to “follow Hume” on that point (January 11), how then, can Mr Wilkinson coherently claim that morality is, or should be, “based on” such things as “biological evolution” or “natural law”? What does “based on” mean, if not "deduced from”? The answer to that central question does, of course, have far-reaching consequences for conservative, quasibiological moralising.—Yours, etc DAVID SHANKS. January 25, 1988.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19880129.2.91.6
Bibliographic details
Press, 29 January 1988, Page 16
Word Count
116Thegosis Press, 29 January 1988, Page 16
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Press. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Copyright in all Footrot Flats cartoons is owned by Diogenes Designs Ltd. The National Library has been granted permission to digitise these cartoons and make them available online as part of this digitised version of the Press. You can search, browse, and print Footrot Flats cartoons for research and personal study only. Permission must be obtained from Diogenes Designs Ltd for any other use.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Christchurch City Libraries.