-According to the 'standard' logic, 'is'='is' and impossible be 'is'='ought'.
-However, some Marxistic thinkers think about the possibility, if not the factual reality (referring to their alienation theory), of 'is'='ought'. For instance Marcuse in his Onedimensional man speaks about 'dechirement ontologique': S=P is not S=P because S 'ought' to be P.
-Irrespective of deontological questions connected herewith in analytical philosophy, what could be your answers? Thanks, Marc.
Dear Ed,
Please give me the many values of '=' more extensively. Thanks! Marc.
A plausible example of "is" being used with a sense of "ought":
The term "laughable" suggests that the laughter is fitting or appropriate (i.e. merited or deserved in some sense) to its object and is defined by the OED as "... to be laughed at...." *
_____________
* Vide p. 153 of my "Causal capacities and the inherently funny", Conceptus 27 (1994) 149-159.
Dear Karl,
Please send me your contribution in Conceptus 27 (1994) 149-159. Thanks, Marc.
Hello Marc,
Sorry for the delay but the RG notification that you replied is still not there! I am replying because I went looking, and that has to do with the question. "Has a reply notification" is not "=" to have the same, here.
Generally, why "a=a" is different from "a=b"? See Frege, for initial comments.
Going further, one can see that "=" can mean "equality", "equivalence", "comparison", "assignment to the right", "assignment to the left", and others. For example, "2=2" is wrong to a C language compiler, should be "2==2", a comparison test.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Bioecology
- Systems Ecology
- Landscape Ecology
- Connectivity