<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>David Hume on Philosophie-Delor</title><link>https://philosophie-delor.github.io/en/tags/david-hume/</link><description>Recent content in David Hume on Philosophie-Delor</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><copyright>Frieder Delor</copyright><lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://philosophie-delor.github.io/en/tags/david-hume/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Hume’s Is–Ought Problem and Its Solution</title><link>https://philosophie-delor.github.io/en/ethics/hume_is_ought/</link><pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://philosophie-delor.github.io/en/ethics/hume_is_ought/</guid><description>&lt;h1 id="humes-isought-problem-and-its-solution"&gt;Hume’s Is–Ought Problem and Its Solution&lt;a class="anchor" href="#humes-isought-problem-and-its-solution" aria-label="Link"&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;
&lt;h2 id="is-and-ought"&gt;Is and Ought&lt;a class="anchor" href="#is-and-ought" aria-label="Link"&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;David Hume (1739/1978, T 3.1.1.27) observes in the &lt;em&gt;Treatise of Human Nature&lt;/em&gt; that moral philosophers often begin by speaking about facts. They write about what is the case, how people act, what properties they possess, or what conditions obtain in the world. Then, within the same argument, an “ought” or “ought not” appears. Hume notes that this transition often occurs without explanation. Texts begin with statements about what is and then move to statements about what ought to be, without explaining what justifies this new claim.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>