Bookmark and Share

Normativity

Edited by Federico L. G. Faroldi (Università degli Studi di Firenze, Università degli Studi di Pisa)
About this topic
Summary

Defining 'normativity' is itself a normative task, and no clear agreement has been reached on the matter. The normative has often been contrasted with the descriptive; sometimes the normative is thought to be made up of deontic (e.g. 'oughts') and evaluative (e.g. 'good') concepts. 'Normativity' may have at least two senses: first, a nomophoric sense, if one refers to implicit or explicit rules (of various kinds); second, an axiological sense, if one refers to values. Few have defined normativity explicitly; many are interested in the normativity of something else (meaning and content, semantics, aesthetics, moral claims, epistemic norms, context, the law) rather than in normativity itself. When they do, normativity is usually explained (or explained away) with reference to "having reasons".

Key works The contemporary debate on normativity has various threads. A recent, fundamental work dealing directly with 'normativity' tout court is Thomson 2008. The normativity of morality and reason is investigated in Korsgaard 1996. For the normativity of meaning and content, one classical piece is surely Kripke 1982. Fundamental works for the normativity of the law are Kelsen 1967 and Kelsen 1990.
Introductions For an overview of contemporary work on normativity, see Finlay 2010
  Show all references
Related categories
Subcategories:
286 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 286
Material to categorize
  1. H. Bensusan & M. Pinedo (2004). Truth Matters: Normativity in Thought and Knowledge. Theoria 50:137-154.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Michael Bradie (2007). Evolution and Normativity. In Mohan Matthen & Christopher Stephens (eds.), Philosophy of Biology. Elsevier. 201.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Mason Cash (2008). The Normativity Problem: Evolution and Naturalized Semantics. Journal of Mind and Behavior 29 (1-2):99-137.
    Representation is a pivotal concept in cognitive science, yet there is a serious obstacle to a naturalistic account of representations’ semantic content and intentionality. A representation having a determinate semantic content distinguishes correct from incorrect representation. But such correctness is a normative matter. Explaining how such norms can be part of a naturalistic cognitive science is what I call the normativity problem. Teleosemantics attempts to naturalize such norms by showing that evolution by natural selection establishes neural mechanisms’ functions, and such (...)
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Katerina Deligiorgi (2013). The View From Within. Normativity and the Limits of Self‐Criticism. By Menachem Fisch and Yitzhak Benbaji. [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 63 (253):816-819.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Katerina Deligiorgi (2013). The View From Within. Normativity and the Limits of Self‐Criticism. Philosophical Quarterly 63 (253):816-819.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Aleksandar T. Dobrijević (2004). On Different Kinds of Normativity. Theoria 47 (3-4):87-89.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Pascal Engel (2007). Belief and Normativity. Disputatio 2 (23):179-203.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Gl, Against Content Normativity.
  9. K. Gluer & A. Wikforss (2010). The Truth Norm and Guidance: A Reply to Steglich-Petersen. Mind 119 (475):757-761.
    We have claimed that truth norms cannot provide genuine guidance for belief formation (Glüer and Wikforss 2009, pp. 43–4). Asbjørn Steglich-Petersen argues that our ‘no guidance argument’ fails because it conflates certain psychological states an agent must have in order to apply the truth norm with the condition under which the norm prescribes forming certain beliefs. We spell out the no guidance argument in more detail and show that there is no such conflation.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Jaap Hage (2011). Elusive Normativity. Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy 2:146-168.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Tobias Keiling (2014). What Phenomenology Ought to Be. Research in Phenomenology:281-300.
    Steven Crowell’s rich book is an eminent advance in the interpretation of Husserl and Heidegger, in thinking about the nature of phenomenology as a way of philosophical inquiry, and in accessing the contribution phenomenology can make to philosophy in general. Just as its predecessor Husserl, Heidegger, and the Space of Meaning (2001) has not stood uncontested—the review by Taylor Carman, for instance, is very critical—Crowell’s new book on normativity is also likely to spur debate. But such debate should be most (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. M. Laclau (1987). Windelband's Notion of Normativity. Rechtstheorie 18 (3):335-343.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Matthias Lutz-Bachmann (2011). Focus: Institutionalization as a Condition of Normativity? Introduction. Philosophisches Jahrbuch 118 (2):295-297.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Conor McHugh (2013). Normativism and Doxastic Deliberation. Analytic Philosophy 54 (4):447-465.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Conor McHugh & Daniel Whiting (2014). The Normativity of Belief. Analysis 74 (4):698-713.
    This is a survey of recent debates concerning the normativity of belief. We explain what the thesis that belief is normative involves, consider arguments for and against that thesis, and explore its bearing on debates in metaethics.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Andrew McKinlay (1991). Agreement and Normativity. In Klaus Puhl (ed.), Meaning Scepticism. De Gruyter. 189--200.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Christopher Mcmahon (2007). Nondomination and Normativity. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 88 (3):319-327.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Alan Millar, A Précis of Understanding People: Normativity and Rationalizing Explanation.
    The article provides a summary of the author's book Understanding People: Normativity and Rationalizing Explanation (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004). It details three areas in which the notion of a normative commitment is made central. These are (1) believing and intending, (2) practices conceived as essentially rule-governed activities, and (3) meaning and concepts. An account is given of how we may best explain the commitments incurred by beliefs and intentions. It is held that those states are themselves essentially normative. A problem (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Marcin Młlkowski & Konrad Talmont-Kaminski (eds.) (2010). Beyond Description: Naturalism and Normativity. College Publications.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. John Skorupskispecial Issue On Normativity & Edited by Teresa Marques Rationality (2007). What is Normativity? Special Issue on Normativity and Rationality, Edited by Teresa Marques 2 (23).
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Pascal Engelspecial Issue On Normativity & Edited by Teresa Marques Rationality (2007). Belief and Normativity. Special Issue on Normativity and Rationality, Edited by Teresa Marques (23).
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Ragnar Francén Olinder (2012). Rescuing Doxastic Normativism. Theoria 78 (4):293-308.
    According to doxastic normativism, part of what makes an attitude a belief rather than another type of attitude is that it is governed by a truth-norm. It has been objected that this view fails since there are true propositions such that if you believed them they would not be true, and thus the obligation to believe true propositions cannot hold for these. I argue that the solution for doxastic normativists is to find a norm that draws the right distinction between (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Jaroslav Peregrin, Social Normativism.
    Normativity is one of the keywords of contemporary philosophical discussions (which partly reincarnate traditional debates about the differences between Geisteswissenschaften and Naturwissenschaften ). But are the philosophers who argue for the irreducible role of normativity within accounts for human societies obliged to assume, as Stephen Turner has recently put it, the existence of a "non‐natural, non‐empirical stuff that is claimed to be necessarily, intrinsically there and to in some sense account for the actual"?
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Miroslav Popper (2007). Normativity: Approaches, Polemics, Problems. Human Affairs 17 (1).
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Sheldon Richmond (2013). The View From Within: Normativity and the Limits of Self-Criticism by Menachem Fisch and Yitzhak Benbaji. Tradition and Discovery: The Polanyi Society Periodical 40 (3):50-52.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Mark Schroeder (forthcoming). The Nature of Normativity. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Nishi Shah (2009). The Normativity of Belief and Self-Fulfilling Normative Beliefs. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 39 (sup1):189-212.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Paolo Silvestri (2008). Il normativo nell’homo œconomicus, il normativo dell’homo œconomicus [The normative in the homo oeconomicus, the normative of the homo oeconomicus]. In Enzo Di Nuoscio & Paolo Heritier (eds.), Le culture di Babele. Saggi di antropologia filosofico-giuridica. Medusa. 173-192.
  29. Wouter H. Slob (2002). How to Distinguish Good and Bad Arguments: Dialogico-Rhetorical Normativity. Argumentation 16 (2):179-196.
    Deductivism is not merely a logical technique, but also a theory of normativity: it provides an objective and universal standard of evaluation. Contemporary dialectical logic rejects deductive normativity, replacing its universal standard by an intersubjective standard. It is argued in this paper that dialectical normativity does not improve upon deductive normativity. A dialogico-rhetorical alternative is proposed.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Ernest Sosa & Enrique Villanueva (eds.) (2006). Philosophical Issues, Normativity. Wiley-Blackwell.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Danie Fm Strauss (2011). Normativity II–Towards an Integral Perspective. South African Journal of Philosophy 30 (3):360-383.
    This is a follow-up article of Strauss 2011. In order to transcend the shortcomings present in the dialectical legacy regarding normativity, this article further explores key elements within the dialectical tradition focused on the basic motive of nature and freedom and the effect it had on modern social contract theories which aimed at reconstructing human society from its “atoms,” the individuals. The transition to an alternative approach commences with a discussion of the distinction between conditions and what is conditioned. It (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Michael-John Turp (2013). Belief, Truth and Virtue. Teorema: Revista Internacional de Filosofía 32 (3):91-104.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Claudine Verheggen (2011). Semantic Normativity and Naturalism. Logique Et Analyse 216.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
Normativity and Naturalism
  1. Argyris Arnellos, Thomas Spyrou & Ioannis Darzentas (2010). Naturalising the Design Process: Autonomy and Interaction as Core Features. In Marcin Miłkowski Konrad Talmont-Kaminski (ed.), Beyond Description: Naturalism and Normativity. College Publications.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Christoph Asmuth & Patrick Grüneberg (eds.) (2011). Subjekt Und Gehirn, Mensch Und Natur. Königshausen & Neumann.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Guy Axtell (2012). The Dialectics of Objectivity. Journal of the Philosophy of History 6 (3):339-368.
    This paper develops under-recognized connections between moderate historicist methodology and character (or virtue) epistemology, and goes on to argue that their combination supports a “dialectical” conception of objectivity. Considerations stemming from underdetermination problems motivate our claim that historicism requires agent-focused rather than merely belief-focused epistemology; embracing this point helps historicists avoid the charge of relativism. Considerations stemming from the genealogy of epistemic virtue concepts motivate our claim that character epistemologies are strengthened by moderate historicism about the epistemic virtues and values (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Guy Axtell (1993). Naturalism, Normativity, and Explanation: The Scientistic Biases of Contemporary Naturalism. Metaphilosophy 24 (3):253-274.
    The critical focus of this paper is on a claim made explicitly by Gilbert Harman and accepted implicitly by numerous others, the claim that naturalism supports concurrent defense of scientific objectivism and moral relativism. I challenge the assumptions of Harman's ‘argument from naturalism' used to support this combination of positions, utilizing. Hilary Putnam’s ‘companions in guilt’ argument in order to counter it. The paper concludes that while domain-specific anti-realism is often warranted, Harman’s own views about the objectivity of facts and (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Aude Bandini (2011). Meaning and the Emergence of Normativity. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 18 (3):415-431.
    Linguistic meaning has an essential normative dimension that prima facie cannot be reduced to descriptive, non-normative, terms. Taking this point for granted, this paper however aims at proposing a naturalist view of semantics - inspired by Wilfrid Sellars' original works - focused on the way the constitutive normative aspects of meaning might be properly explained and accounted for, rather than eliminated.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Mark Bauer (2009). Normativity Without Artifice. Philosophical Studies 144 (2):239-259.
    To ascribe a telos is to ascribe a norm or standard of performance. That fact underwrites the plausibility of, say, teleological theories of mind. Teleosemantics, for example, relies on the normative character of teleology to solve the problem of “intentional inexistence”: a misrepresentation is just a malfunction. If the teleological ascriptions of such theories to natural systems, e.g., the neurological structures of the brain, are to be literally true, then it must be literally true that norms can exist independent of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Claus Beisbart (2008). Normativity and Naturalism, Edited by Peter Schaber. European Journal of Philosophy 16 (2):325-329.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Jan Bransen (2002). Normativity as the Key to Objectivity: An Exploration of Robert Brandom's Articulating Reasons. Inquiry 45 (3):373 – 391.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Mark J. Cherry (2009). The Normativity of the Natural : Can Philosophers Pull Morality Out of the Magic Hat of Human Nature? In , The Normativity of the Natural: Human Goods, Human Virtues, and Human Flourishing. Springer.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Stephen R. L. Clark (1985). The Expanding Circle: Ethics and Sociobiology By Peter Singer Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981, Xiv+190 Pp., £6.95The Shaping of Man: Philosophical Aspects of Sociobiology By Roger Trigg Oxford: Blackwell, 1982, Xx+186 Pp., £12.50, £6.95 Paper. [REVIEW] Philosophy 60 (233):411-.
  11. Sharyn Clough (2004). Having It All: Naturalized Normativity in Feminist Science Studies. Hypatia 19 (1):102-118.
    : The relationship between facts and values—in particular, naturalism and normativity—poses an ongoing challenge for feminist science studies. Some have argued that the fact/value holism of W.V. Quine's naturalized epistemology holds promise. I argue that Quinean epistemology, while appropriately naturalized, might weaken the normative force of feminist claims. I then show that Quinean epistemic themes are unnecessary for feminist science studies. The empirical nature of our work provides us with all the naturalized normativity we need.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Mark Colyvan (2009). Naturalising Normativity. In David Braddon-Mitchell & Robert Nola (eds.), Conceptual Analysis and Philosophical Naturalism. Mit Press.
    In this paper I discuss the problem of providing an account of the normative force of theories of rationality. The theories considered are theories of rational inference, rational belief and rational decision— logic, probability theory and decision theory, respectively. I provide a naturalistic account of the normativity of these theories that is not viciously circular. The account offered does have its limitations though: it delivers a defeasible account of rationality. On this view, theories of rational inference, belief and decision are (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Mario de Caro & David Macarthur (2010). Introduction: Science, Naturalism, and the Problem of Normativity. In Mario de Caro & David Macarthur (eds.), Naturalism and Normativity. Columbia University Press.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Mario de Caro & David Macarthur (eds.) (2010). Naturalism and Normativity. Columbia University Press.
    Naturalism and Normativity engages with both sides of this debate. Essays explore philosophical options for understanding normativity in the space between scientific naturalism and Platonic supernaturalism.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Florian Demont (2012). Chomsky's Methodological Naturalism and the Mereological Fallacy. In Piotr Stalmaszcyzk (ed.), Philosophical and Formal Approaches to Linguistic Analysis. Ontos Verlag. 113.
  16. Willem A. deVries (2011). Naturalism, the Autonomy of Reason, and Pictures. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 18 (3):395-413.
    Sellars was committed to the irreducibility of the semantic, the intentional, and the normative. Nevertheless, he was also committed to naturalism, which is prima facie at odds with his other theses. This paper argues that Sellars maintained his naturalism by being linguistically pluralistic but ontologically monistic . There are irreducibly distinct forms of discourse, because there is an array of distinguishable functions that language and thought perform, but we are not ontologically committed to the array of apparently non-natural entities or (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Willem A. DeVries (ed.) (2009). Empiricism, Perceptual Knowledge, Normativity, and Realism: Essays on Wilfrid Sellars. Oxford University Press.
    The ten essays in this collection were written to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the lectures which became Wilfrid Sellars's Empiricism and the Philosophy of ...
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 286