Posts

Comments

Comment by daniel-uebele on Sam Harris and the Is–Ought Gap · 2019-02-13T00:45:59.211Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

I think I can express Sam's point using logical argumentation.

1) Your internal motivational structure is aimed at X.

2) Y is a pre-requisite for X.

3) You ought to do Y in order to achieve X. (This is the only sense in which "ought" means anything).

First time post! I signed up just to say this. If there's a problem with the formulation I just described, I'd love to know what that is. I've been confused for years about why this seems so difficult for some, or why Sam can't put it in these terms.