Theoretical Motivation of “Ought Implies Can”

@alexbryant_ From @wesbuc: https://t.co/VshOWemQwl That said, I personally think the principle is incontrovertible.

@kph3k It's a bit more general than free will, but there is a recent debate about ought implies can, or if responsibility requires ability, you might be interested in. Some theoretical reasons to reject it https://t.co/9BMoEYSkaT as well as some empirical

@DanielleWenner Broken clocks what can I say! Go into it a bit in a few papers if curious https://t.co/9BMoEYSkaT and here https://t.co/kOAMskFzsr, and also from others https://t.co/bEpQdsNhy4

New work @MancPhilosophy @wesbuc Does Ought Imply Can? Check it out! https://t.co/3epLhxdAvw

"...progress in ethics can be made by adopting a more nuanced account of morality tolerant of inability and by rejecting the poorly motivated theory that ought implies can." -@wesbuc https://t.co/tQJXhcLHo8

RT @SpringerEthics: Philosophia Theoretical Motivation of “Ought Implies Can” https://t.co/kl9M6MN9yt https://t.co/5mTQGdX40G

Philosophia Theoretical Motivation of “Ought Implies Can” https://t.co/kl9M6MN9yt https://t.co/5mTQGdX40G

RT @PhilosophiaQISR: #OpenAccess in Philosophia: Wesley Buckwalter, "Theoretical Motivation of 'Ought Implies Can'" (2019) @SpringerEthic…

Theoretical Motivation for ‘Ought-Implies-Can’ https://t.co/jb6msYfWka

Instead of ‘ought implies can’, should it be ‘ceteris paribus (all else being equal), ought implies can’? This seems to support the moral psychology literature, but perhaps could also assist normative goal-setting and moral responsibility under risk?