Ought we accept Hume’s severing of any connection between ‘is’ and ‘ought’?
How do you decide whether you ought to do something? Chances are you’ve employed statements about how things are or have been as the basis for making a judgment call. The 18th-century Scottish philosopher David Hume forcefully argued against this approach. According to ‘Hume’s law’, also known as the ‘is/ought problem’, determining what you ought to do based on what is represents a logical mistake because there’s a gap that reason cannot bridge between the facts of the world and the values you might espouse.
videoEthics
A deathbed scenario raises the question: how much power should a promise hold?
5 minutes
videoEthics
What’s an idea worth? How prominent thinkers have understood intellectual property
6 minutes
videoMathematics
Spiral into the ‘golden ratio’ – and separate the myths from the maths
4 minutes
videoHistory of science
Meet the Quaker pacifist who shattered British science’s highest glass ceilings
14 minutes
videoHistory
Hags, seductresses, feminist icons – how gender dynamics manifest in witches
13 minutes
videoArt
Background music was the radical invention of a trailblazing composer
17 minutes
