The chapter addresses a puzzle. In an objective sense, one ought to believe all and only what’s true. This loses the normative/natural distinction, making objective oughts conceptually equivalent to naturalistic claims. The needed ought ignores costs and limitations in reasoning. The subjective ought can’t be characterized in terms of objective oughts, but using Hare conditionals to characterize hypothetical imperatives, we can say this: The objective ought is what one ought subjectively to do were it that one ought to believe all that’s so. This involves an idealized self thinking herself the actual self. The special case of what one objectively ought to believe falls out immediately. The suppositions here may be counternormative as well as counterfactual. Putting meaning in terms of truth-conditions, it follows, will be empty. So we must characterize meanings in terms of subjective oughts. Oughts of advice come in a note at the end.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.