Has anyone ever managed to refute pic related?

>>9705859
sounds Nagarjuna esque

i approve

>>9705859
Here is a valid argument where one can deduce an ought from an is.

1. Everything John believes is true.
2. John believes that no one ought to murder the innocent.
3. Therefore, it is true that no one ought to murder the innocent.

Aristotle's deduction of the ethical good from the ontological good also derives an ought from an is.

>>9705957
And by what logical machinations do you deduce 1.

>>9705859
based Hume and his problem of induction

>>9705978
It's a counter example you dimwit

>>9705957
While this is technically correct, his objection is to 'ought' being introduced in the conclusion/proposition based solely on premises about how things are in the world. Premise 2 does introduce an 'ought', although in the form of descriptive statement of what John believes.

>>9705859
Reductio ad absurdum though realizing that the sun ought to rise tomorrow because of a state of affairs that is.

>>9706031
Adding an additional self-referential step to the deduction is not a refutation.