IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jpropr/v39y2022i1p77-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hume’s guillotine - the ‘is-ought’ problem in property valuation theory

Author

Listed:
  • Manya Mooya

Abstract

This paper introduces Hume’s law (the fulcrum of the ‘is-ought’ problem of moral philosophy) into the property valuation literature, and uses it as a prism to reflect on the nature and limitations of standard valuation theory. The paper shows how a consideration of Hume’ thesis can help to clarify and solve some specific practical problems in property valuation. The opportunity presented by the subject of property valuation is, in turn, used to reflect back on Hume’s thesis itself, to show conditions under which Hume’s law may be said to be false. The paper makes important contributions both to the property valuation literature and to the literature on moral philosophy. With respect to property valuation, it proposes a change in the manner conclusions of valuations are reported, and the replacement of the notion of valuation accuracy by the wider and more socially appropriate concept of reasonableness.

Suggested Citation

  • Manya Mooya, 2022. "Hume’s guillotine - the ‘is-ought’ problem in property valuation theory," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 77-96, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jpropr:v:39:y:2022:i:1:p:77-96
    DOI: 10.1080/09599916.2021.1918222
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09599916.2021.1918222
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09599916.2021.1918222?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jpropr:v:39:y:2022:i:1:p:77-96. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJPR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.