Counterexamples
to ought implies can
Does the claim that a certain person
ought to do something entail that they have the ability to do this thing? Here
are some challenges to the view that there is this entailment (see also Buckwalter 2019).
Complaints
Sometimes
it is reasonable complain about being in a situation in which we ought to do
something but are unable to. Michael Stocker gives the example of a man who
believes he should pick up some broken glass on a path used by children who
walk barefoot. But “If some of the children lasso him and tie him to a tree, he
can certainly complain that they are making it impossible for him to do what he
ought to do (or ought to be doing).” (1971: 312)
Promises
Julia
Driver presents the following three inconsistent propositions
(1) Whenever a
person makes a promise to do X, he thereby puts himself under an obligation to
do X.
(2) If someone
is obligated to do X, then he can do X.
(3) Sometimes
people make promises they cannot keep.
One
solution to the inconsistency is to get rid of (2).
Apologies
Alexandra
King presents this counterexample. Suppose you ought to apologize at a certain
time. But apologizing involves more than just saying sorry. It involves
expressing certain emotions in saying this and therefore having these emotions.
But emotions are not something that are under
immediate control, such that one can have the emotion at a given time just by
willing to have it. Thus it may be that a person ought to apologize at a given time, or at some
point within a given period of time, but cannot apologize at that time, because
they do not have the appropriate emotions. King gives the example of parents
rightly telling their child to apologize to Grandma.
References
Buckwalter, W. 2019. Theoretical Motivation for “Ought Implies Can.” Forthcoming in Philosophia.
Driver, J.
1983. Promises, obligations and abilities. Philosophical
Studies 44: 221-223.
King, A.
2014. Actions That We Ought,
But Can’t. Ratio 27: 316-327.
Stocker, M.
1971. ‘Ought’ and ‘Can’. Australasian
Journal of Philosophy 49: 303-316.