, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 571-580

First online:

Problems with Searle’s Derivation?

  • Edmund WallAffiliated withDepartment of Philosophy, East Carolina University Email author 

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access


In his paper, “How to Derive ‘Ought’ From ‘Is,’” John R. Searle made a valiant attempt to derive an ought-statement from purely descriptive statements. In a recent issue of Philosophia, Scott Hill has offered criticisms of that proposed derivation. I argue that Hill has not established any errors in Searle's proposed derivation.


Descriptive statement Evaluative statement Hill, Scott Is/Ought distinction Searle’s derivation of “ought” from “is”