Is - Should Be "problems And" Solve "

In the history of western philosophy, Hume was the first to point out the difference between fact and value. This is the famous 'Is-Ought' Problem. He insisted that it was impossible to logically deduce a proposition of values from propositions of facts. From then on, almost all ethic philosophers paid much attention to distinguish and discuss the relationship between fact and value. It's G. E. Moore and his criticism of " the naturalistic fallacy" that make the 'Is-Ought' Problem more meaningful.The first chapter of the paper introduces the background of 'Is-Ought' Problem and its significance. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th chapters introduce respectively Evolutionary Ethics, Prisoner's Dilemma of Game Theory and Utilitarianism and their efforts on how to solve the 'Is-Ought' problem. Different approaches are compared and evaluated in this paper. As it's pointed out in the conclusion of this paper that these approaches narrows the gap between fact and value but they can't eliminate it. So Deontology can not be replaced completely by Evolutionary Ethics , Game theory or Utilitarianism. The relationships among them are supplementary, not exclusive.