David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Investigations 36 (1):56-78 (2013)
This paper defends the thesis that meaning is intrinsically normative. Recent anti-normativist objectors have distinguished two versions of the thesis – correctness and prescriptivity – and have attacked both. In the first two sections, I defend the thesis against each of these attacks; in the third section, I address two further, closely related, anti-normativist arguments against the normativity thesis and, in the process, clarify its sense by distinguishing a universalist and a contextualist reading of it. I argue that the anti-normativist position is successful only against the universalist reading but point out that normativists do not require this reading of the thesis; the contextualist one is both possible and desirable for them. Furthermore, I argue that anti-normativists require the contextualist reading of the normativity thesis to make their case, as well as to avoid meaning relativism. In the final two sections of the paper, I explain how a contextualist understanding of the normativity thesis is compatible with Quine's elimination of analyticity, thus undermining a key underlying reason for anti-normativism, and I respond to the objection that a contextualist reading of the normativity thesis is either self-contradictory or else trivial
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Akeel Bilgrami (1998). Replies. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 58 (3):635-647.
Paul A. Boghossian (2003). The Normativity of Content. Philosophical Issues 13 (1):31-45.
Paul A. Boghossian (1989). The Rule-Following Considerations. Mind 98 (392):507-49.
Robert B. Brandom (1994). Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment. Harvard University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Adolf Rami (2005). Über Die Sogenannte Normativität der Bedeutung. Grazer Philosophische Studien 68 (1):81-117.
Daniel Whiting (2009). On Epistemic Conceptions of Meaning: Use, Meaning and Normativity. European Journal of Philosophy 17 (3):416-434.
Daniel Whiting (2007). The Normativity of Meaning Defended. Analysis 67 (294):133–140.
Jaroslav Peregrin (2012). Inferentialism and the Normativity of Meaning. Philosophia 40 (1):75-97.
Andrei Buleandra (2008). Normativity and Correctness: A Reply to Hattiangadi. [REVIEW] Acta Analytica 23 (2):177-186.
Hannah Ginsborg (2012). Meaning, Understanding and Normativity. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 86 (1):127-146.
John Fennell (2003). The Three Quines. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 11 (3):261 – 292.
WR Stirton (1997). Anti-Realism, Truth-Conditions and Verificationism. Mind 106 (424):697-716.
Nenad Smokrović (2002). Semantic Naturalism and Normativity. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 2 (1):71-81.
Sanford Shieh (1998). On the Conceptual Foundations of Anti-Realism. Synthese 115 (1):33-70.
Anandi Hattiangadi (2006). Is Meaning Normative? Mind and Language 21 (2):220-240.
Nicla Vassallo & Claudia Bianchi (2007). Meaning, Contexts and Justification. In D. C. Richardson B. Kokinov (ed.), Modeling and Using Context. Springer. 69--81.
D. Pritchard (2002). Two Forms of Epistemological Contextualism. Grazer Philosophische Studien 64 (1):19-55.
Added to index2012-02-27
Total downloads60 ( #24,050 of 1,096,570 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #68,895 of 1,096,570 )
How can I increase my downloads?