This paper solves the is-ought problem based on an extended critical rationalism, the Quine-Duhem thesis, and evolutionary theory. Traditional impossibility proofs and the so-called "naturalistic fallacy" rest on dogmatically immunized, circular concepts without empirical foundation and demand isolated derivations. Ought-statements are goal-relative claims about means-end relations of real subjects with instrumental or ultimate goals. The ultimate goal cannot be derived logically, but must be determined empirically, and it cannot be freely chosen, since this would presuppose a libertarian free will, the assumption of which is rejected in this paper. Evolutionary theory identifies it as lineage fitness, the teleonomic goal of living systems to which all known goals are instrumentally subordinate. This yields a cognitivist, consequentialist, epistemically objective ethics whose foundations and norms are not immunized against criticism. Eine Deutsche Version kann hier gefunden werden: https://philpapers.org/rec/DELDLD-13
Frieder Sebastian Delor (Sun,) studied this question.