Abstract
In this note I question this claim by indicating some of the unacceptable consequences of Hare's definition. As a preliminary, we need to decide whether Hare means the If . . . then . which occurs in it to be rendered as material implication. In a discussion of the conditions under which the advice lectures on the Ethics are better than would have been ignored, Hare makes it fairly clear that the conditional is to be taken as material implication; for he says that only in the case of the pupil's going to B's lectures and not to A's can the pupil be accused of not taking the advice. However, Hare has confused the issue by saying just prior to the discussion of this example:
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
