Editing Is–ought problem (section)

===Institutional facts===
[[John Searle]] also attempts to derive "ought" from "is".<ref>{{cite journal |last=Searle |first=John R. |authorlink=John Searle
 |title=How to Derive 'Ought' From 'Is' |journal=[[The Philosophical Review]] |volume=73 |year=1964 |issue=1 |pages=43–58 |doi=10.2307/2183201 |jstor=2183201 }}</ref> He tries to show that the act of making a promise places one under an obligation by definition, and that such an obligation amounts to an "ought". This view is still widely debated, and to answer criticisms, Searle has further developed the concept of [[institutional fact]]s, for example, that a certain building ''is'' in fact a bank and that certain paper ''is'' in fact money, which would seem to depend upon general recognition of those institutions and their value.<ref>{{cite book |last=Searle |first=John R. |authorlink=John Searle |year=1995 |title=The construction of social reality |location=New York |publisher=[[Free Press (publisher)|Free Press]] |isbn=0-02-928045-1 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/constructionofso00sear }}</ref>