Quick note: Hume's dictum is misattributed to Hume. He discusses it briefly in THN, but manifestly ignores it in the rest of his life's work, as did his greatest student Adam Smith. The is-ought gap is really resurrected by Kant.
I burgeon against your idea that the fact/value split is what led to things like the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Clearly shared "ideals" however these be conceived are a part of America's founding documents. I'd posit that the establishment clause has more to do about institutional realities than it does philosophical preconditions of a liberal polity.
But values drive one’s attention towards certain facts over others, therefore then the outcome is that [different sets of facts] then reinforce divergent values…. ad infinitum. An example of this might be ideas concerning “When does a life begin?” Conception (?) Zygote/Blastocyst Formation before implant in the uterine wall (?) or 6-10 days later (?) etc… all “Scientific Facts”, but what we preconceptually latch onto as being relevant and valuable to us perceptually, then has huge social implications for “A Woman’s Right to Choose” and or a myriad of other interconnected social scale issues. I don’t think with issues such ‘Racially Based Slavery’ and or a lack of ‘Women’s Rights’, only recently in human history being seriously challenged as Scientifically Evil, (can one even say that?) that there was ever a time in civilizations past where the ‘fact/values’ dichotomy was unified. And if it ever was… it certainly was ignorantly and fraudulently achieved through suppression strategies.
I sat in a meeting with a very bright man who just simply said that science is all we really need. When pushed on some issues he said that we only need to give science time to solve all of our problems and understandings. Facts are important but as you have so clearly pointed out they are not much if not guided by values. Like Tim I look forward to your next post. Thanks
Can't wait to see your follow-up posts!
Quick note: Hume's dictum is misattributed to Hume. He discusses it briefly in THN, but manifestly ignores it in the rest of his life's work, as did his greatest student Adam Smith. The is-ought gap is really resurrected by Kant.
I burgeon against your idea that the fact/value split is what led to things like the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Clearly shared "ideals" however these be conceived are a part of America's founding documents. I'd posit that the establishment clause has more to do about institutional realities than it does philosophical preconditions of a liberal polity.
But values drive one’s attention towards certain facts over others, therefore then the outcome is that [different sets of facts] then reinforce divergent values…. ad infinitum. An example of this might be ideas concerning “When does a life begin?” Conception (?) Zygote/Blastocyst Formation before implant in the uterine wall (?) or 6-10 days later (?) etc… all “Scientific Facts”, but what we preconceptually latch onto as being relevant and valuable to us perceptually, then has huge social implications for “A Woman’s Right to Choose” and or a myriad of other interconnected social scale issues. I don’t think with issues such ‘Racially Based Slavery’ and or a lack of ‘Women’s Rights’, only recently in human history being seriously challenged as Scientifically Evil, (can one even say that?) that there was ever a time in civilizations past where the ‘fact/values’ dichotomy was unified. And if it ever was… it certainly was ignorantly and fraudulently achieved through suppression strategies.
Looking forward to how this progresses! Are you going to take a look at Charles Taylor?
I sat in a meeting with a very bright man who just simply said that science is all we really need. When pushed on some issues he said that we only need to give science time to solve all of our problems and understandings. Facts are important but as you have so clearly pointed out they are not much if not guided by values. Like Tim I look forward to your next post. Thanks