Hume has famously said that “Reason is, and ought to be, the slave of the passions.”
Later on, he also said, “You cannot get an ‘ought’ from an ‘is.'”
Doesn’t the second statement contradict his first statement? Any Hume scholarships out there that can explain this?
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
About shaunmiller
I have just completed a visiting position as an assistant professor at Dalhousie University. My ideas are not associated with my employer; they are expressions of my own thoughts and ideas. Some of them are just musings while others could be serious discussions that could turn into a bigger project.
Besides philosophy, I enjoy martial arts (Kuk Sool Won), playing my violin, enjoying coffee around town, and experimenting with new food.
Shaun Miller's Ideas 
Maybe Hume was a joker. That’s my hIpothotheese.