Abstract

The infamous fact/value dichotomy has been a controversial thesis that, especially during the twentieth century, has influenced the ethical andepistemological reflections within analytic philosophy, several non-philosophicaldisciplines like law and economics, and also the laymen way of thinking about moralsubjects. The dichotomy basically says that our statements of fact are objective and 103 Néstor Rodríguez  La cruzada de Putnam contra La Dicotomía Hecho/Valor… rational while our value judgments are, necessarily, subjective and, therefore, don`tdeserve to be rationally discussed. This way of thinking has been largely detrimentalto ethical reflection in general and various philosophers have been looking for a wayto argue against it and to promote its abandonment in order to recover talk of moralobjectivity. This article serves as a general review of the discussion concerning thefact/value dichotomy and its alleged collapse. We follow, as a guide, the work of the late American philosopher Hilary Putnamsince his has become the most significant when it comes to favor the abandonment ofthe dichotomy and the one most prominent in sketching an alternative perspective.According to this, the structure of the article puts forwards three sections. In the firstwe consider the arguments Putnam has in favor of the collapse of the fact/valuedichotomy. In the second we take a look at the ethical and metaethical landscapemodeled by the defense of the dichotomy and also at some of the assumptions thathave been linked to it. Finally, the third section presents briefly the alternativeposition Putnam offers in face of the inevitable collapse.