David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Review 120 (4):515-566 (2011)
The philosophical interest of verbal disputes is twofold. First, they play a key role in philosophical method. Many philosophical disagreements are at least partly verbal, and almost every philosophical dispute has been diagnosed as verbal at some point. Here we can see the diagnosis of verbal disputes as a tool for philosophical progress. Second, they are interesting as a subject matter for first-order philosophy. Reflection on the existence and nature of verbal disputes can reveal something about the nature of concepts, language, and meaning. In this article I first characterize verbal disputes, spell out a method for isolating and resolving them, and draw out conclusions for philosophical methodology. I then use the framework to draw out consequences in first-order philosophy. In particular, I argue that the analysis of verbal disputes can be used to support the existence of a distinctive sort of primitive concept and that it can be used to reconstruct a version of an analytic/synthetic distinction, where both are characterized in dialectical terms alone.
|Keywords||verbal disputes philosophical methodology concepts analytic/synthetic distinction disagreement|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Ned Hall & L. A. Paul (2013). Metaphysically Reductive Causation. Erkenntnis 78 (1):9-41.
Peter Schulte (2013). Beyond Verbal Disputes: The Compatibilism Debate Revisited. [REVIEW] Erkenntnis:1-17.
David Plunkett (2012). A Positivist Route for Explaining How Facts Make Law. Legal Theory 18 (2):139-207.
David Plunkett & Timothy Sundell (2013). Dworkin's Interpretivism and the Pragmatics of Legal Disputes. Legal Theory 19 (3):242-281.
Similar books and articles
Alan Sidelle (2007). The Method of Verbal Dispute. Philosophical Topics 35 (1/2):83-113.
C. S. I. Jenkins (2014). Merely Verbal Disputes. Erkenntnis 79 (1):11-30.
Gerald Marsh (2010). Is the Hirsch-Sider Dispute Merely Verbal? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (3):459-469.
Eli Hirsch (2005). Physical-Object Ontology, Verbal Disputes, and Common Sense. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (1):67–97.
Karen Bennett (2009). Composition, Colocation, and Metaontology. In David John Chalmers, David Manley & Ryan Wasserman (eds.), Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford University Press.
Andrew Carstairs (1987). Roman Jakobson: Verbal Art, Verbal Sign, Verbal Time (Review). Philosophy and Literature 11 (1):182-184.
Jiri Benovsky (2011). Endurance, Perdurance, and Metaontology. SATS (2):159-177.
Anna Brożek (2012). Spory rzeczowe i słowne. Filozofia Nauki 4.
Brendan Balcerak Jackson (2013). Verbal Disputes and Substantiveness. Erkenntnis (1):1-24.
Eric Steinberg (1987). Hume on Liberty, Necessity and Verbal Disputes. Hume Studies 13 (2):113-137.
Jay David Atlas (2005). Logic, Meaning, and Conversation: Semantical Underdeterminacy, Implicature, and Their Interface. Oxford University Press.
R. Brown & David N. McNeill (1966). The "Tip of the Tongue" Phenomenon. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 5:325-37.
Bart Hollebrandse, Angeliek Hout & Petra Hendriks (2012). Children's First and Second-Order False-Belief Reasoning in a Verbal and a Low-Verbal Task. Synthese (3):1-13.
Alessandro Lenci (1998). The Structure of Predication. Synthese 114 (2):233-276.
Kristie Miller (2010). On the Concept of Sexual Perversion. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (241):808-830.
Added to index2011-09-24
Total downloads311 ( #674 of 1,089,155 )
Recent downloads (6 months)24 ( #4,343 of 1,089,155 )
How can I increase my downloads?