ABSTRACT
This chapter with a very brief examination of two points which are related to our last objection, related in that neither is strictly identical with the charge that the naturalistic fallacy has been committed and both have to do with the line between ethics and psychology. It begins to appreciate the significance of von Wright's work in distinguishing a variety of forms of goodness. Von Wright makes an interesting point by drawing a distinction between first person-present tense value judgments and all others. He contends that only the former are genuine value judgments and he does this, not only in the realm of moral goodness, but also as far as hedonic and eudemonic goodness are concerned. The happiness of a happy man passes a judgment on his life, however inarticulate; when he says 'I am happy', this formal judgment merely reports the eudemonic judgment already passed.
