Theoretical Motivation of “Ought Implies Can”

  title={Theoretical Motivation of “Ought Implies Can”},
  author={Wesley Buckwalter},
A standard principle in ethics is that moral obligation entails ability, or that “ought implies can”. A strong case has been made that this principle is not well motivated in moral psychology. This paper presents an analogous case against the theoretical motivation for the principle. The principle is in tension with several foundational areas of ethical theorizing, including research on apologies, excuses, promises, moral dilemmas, moral language, disability, and moral agency. Across each of… Expand
1 Citations
How to Play the “Playing God” Card
An argumentation theory approach is provided and an argumentation scheme and accompanying critical questions that capture the moral concerns expressed by “playing God” arguments are provided. Expand


Ability, Responsibility, and Global Justice
Many have argued that we have a moral obligation to assist others in need, but given the scope of global suffering, how far does this obligation extend? According to one traditional philosophicalExpand
Moral dilemmas, disjunctive obligations, and Kant's principle that ‘ought’ implies ‘can’
In moral dilemmas, where circumstances prevent two or more equally justified prima facie ethical requirements from being fulfilled, it is often maintained that, since the agent cannot do both,Expand
“Ought Implies Can,” Framing Effects, and “Empirical Refutations”
This paper aims to contribute to the current debate about the status of the “Ought Implies Can” (OIC) principle and the growing body of empirical evidence that undermines it. We report the results ofExpand
The Best Argument for 'Ought Implies Can' Is a Better Argument Against 'Ought Implies Can'
To argue that “ought” implies “can,” one can appeal to general principles or to intuitions about specific cases. One general truism that seems to show that “ought” implies “can” is that obligationsExpand
Précis of Building Better Beings: A Theory of Moral Responsibility
The idea of moral responsibility is central to a wide range of our moral, social, and legal practices, and it underpins our basic notion of culpability. Yet the idea of moral responsibility isExpand
Using moral principles to guide decisions
A long line of moral philosophers have argued that one, or the principal, role of a moral theory is to provide guidance to agents in deciding what to do. Given this, they have rejected as inadequateExpand
Blame, not ability, impacts moral “ought” judgments for impossible actions: Toward an empirical refutation of “ought” implies “can”
Results together show that folk moral judgments do not conform to a widely assumed philosophical principle that "ought" implies "can," and that judgments of blame play a modulatory role in some judgments of obligation. Expand
How “ought” exceeds but implies “can”: Description and encouragement in moral judgment
  • J. Turri
  • Psychology, Medicine
  • Cognition
  • 2017
Results from two behavioral experiments support the theory that "ought" exceeds but implies "can," and results from a third experiment provide further evidence regarding an 'ought" claim's primary function and how contextual features can affect the interpretation of its functions. Expand
“Cannot” Implies “Not Ought”
I argue for a version of “ought” implies “can”. In particular, I argue that it is necessarily true that if an agent, S, ultima facie ought to do A at T’, then there is a time T* such that S can at T*Expand
Inability and Obligation in Moral Judgment
Together these results demonstrate that commonsense morality rejects the “ought implies can” principle for moral requirements, and that judgments about moral obligation are made independently of considerations about ability. Expand