Copy the page URI to the clipboard
Pinder, Mark
(2021).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2018.1557543
Abstract
According to Herman Cappelen’s Austerity Framework, conceptual engineering doesn’t involve concepts, and barely involves engineering. I begin by raising two objections to the Austerity Framework as it stands: the framework cannot account for important normative aspects of conceptual engineering; and it doesn’t give us an adequate response to Strawson-style objections that conceptual engineering serves only to change the subject. I then supplement the Austerity Framework with an account of semantic normativity, which builds on the speaker/semantic meaning distinction, and show that so-supplemented the Austerity Framework successfully overcomes the two objections. I tentatively conclude that semantic normativity should play a key role in how we understand conceptual engineering.
Viewing alternatives
Download history
Metrics
Public Attention
Altmetrics from AltmetricNumber of Citations
Citations from DimensionsItem Actions
Export
About
- Item ORO ID
- 57548
- Item Type
- Journal Item
- ISSN
- 0020-174X
- Keywords
- conceptual engineering; austerity framework; semantic normativity; limits of revision
- Academic Unit or School
-
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) > Social Sciences and Global Studies > Philosophy
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) > Social Sciences and Global Studies
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) - Research Group
- Global Challenges and Social Justice
- Copyright Holders
- © 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
- Depositing User
- Mark Pinder