Social Sciences in China (Chinese Edition)

No. 11, 2024

Why We “Must” and “Should”—Bridging the Gap from “Is” to “Ought”

(Abstract)

Chen Bo

 The supposed divide between “is” and “ought,” or “fact,” and “value” and “norm,” as argued by Hume, Moore, and others, is a misconception for two reasons: first, no fact is purely objective. Second, norms are not purely subjective. The necessity of “must” and “should” arises from a confluence of factors: human needs, intentions, and objectives, with intentions and objectives rooted in needs, whose intensity reflects their objective basis; the current state of affairs, often misaligned with needs and intentions, motivating changes to the status quo toward a desired vision; relevant scientific principles across disciplines (including natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities) and social consensus (cultural traditions and customs); and the human capacity for rationality. These elements collectively link “is” to “ought,” thereby constructing a bridge from “facts” to “values” and “norms.”