Two recent papers have presented experimental evidence against the hypothesis that there is a semantic connection between OUGHT and CAN, rather than a pragmatic and defeasible one. However, there are two flaws with their designs. One is temporal ambiguity: just asking whether “x ought to A” is underspecified as to when the obligation exists. Another is failing to distinguish between prior obligations and all-things-considered obligations. To test these potential confounds, the chapter author ran two experiments. The first paired some of the original stories with a visual timeline specifying the time of the obligation. The second flipped the wording of the original “obligated but can’t” question into the reversed: “can’t, but still obligated.” In both experiments, there were large and significant differences between the original and modified conditions. These results undermine the conclusions of the previous experiments and remain consistent with the Semantic Hypothesis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.