Abstract

This paper argues against a conception of normativity that relies too heavily on the notions of guidance and compliance. Both guidance and compliance are argued to be myths, used, by observers, to legitimise their evaluation of persons, conceived of as participants, in game models. The aim of this critique is three-fold: first, to make us more aware of the role of the observer and the act of observation; second, to assist us in acknowledging the inescapable fragility of our practices of making sense of and evaluating others; and thirdly, to help us to see the need for an account of the social life of normativity, i.e., of paying attention to the different dynamics of obligation, legitimation, justification, authority etc, in different kinds of relationships