ABSTRACT
Professor Oppenheim draws the distinction usually attributed to Hume between descriptive and value judgments and points to the existence of a chasm across which no logical bridge can be thrown. He maintains that the predicate "rational' may legitimately be used only to describe judgments or beliefs about matters of fact or logical relations. But the term "rational" cannot be applied to ends themselves; those are neither rational nor irrational, since values are not the kind of entity to which the conception of rationality is applicable. Although in general the author agree with Professor Oppenheim, it is incompatible with the general proposition which the author take to be the basis of his view of the relation of facts to ends, descriptive judgments to those of values; it would demand a radical modification of this view.
