Robert Brandom on Communication, Reference, and Objectivity
International Journal of Philosophical Studies 18 (3):433-458 (2011)
| Abstract | The two main challenges of the theory of conceptual content presented by Robert Brandom in Making It Explicit are to account for a referential dimension of conceptual content and to account for the objectivity of conceptual norms. Brandom tries to meet both these challenges in chapter 8 of his book. I argue that the accounts presented there can only be understood if seen against the background of Brandom's theory of communication developed in chapter 7. This theory is motivated by the well-known problem that semantic holism threatens the possibility of communication because it has the consequence that words mean different things in different mouths. Brandom offers a solution to this problem in terms of what he calls recurrence commitments. I show that chapter 8 of Making It Explicit should be understood as arguing that a practice that includes acknowledging interpersonal recurrence commitments institutes both conceptual contents with a referential dimension and objective conceptual norms. I close by raising the objection that Brandom's argument can only show that conceptual norms are communally shared and not that they are objective. I propose an emendation of this argument, having recourse to a practice Brandom refers to as rational rectification in his new book Between Saying and Doing | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,631 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesDavid Lauer (2009). Genuine Normativity, Expressive Bootstrapping, and Normative Phenomenalism. Etica and Politica / Ethics & Politics 11 (1):321-350.
Kevin Scharp (2005). Scorekeeping in a Defective Language Game. Pragmatics and Cognition 13:203-226.
Kevin Scharp (2009). Truth and Expressive Completeness. In Reading Brandom.
Lionel Shapiro (2004). Brandom on the Normativity of Meaning. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (1):141-60.
Kevin Scharp (2003). Communication and Content: Circumstances and Consequences of the Habermas-Brandom Debate. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 11 (1):43 – 61.
Steven Hendley (2010). Answerable to the World: Experience and Practical Intentionality in Brandom's and McDowell's "Intramural" Debate. Theoria 76 (2):129-151.
Robert Briscoe (2007). Communication and Rational Responsiveness to the World. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 88:135-159.
Kevin Scharp (forthcoming). Brandom on Communication. In Jason Hannon & Robert Rutland (eds.), Philosophical Profiles in the Theory of Communication. McGill-Queen's University Press.
Anandi Hattiangadi (2003). Making It Implicit: Brandom on Rule-Following. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (2):419-31.
Gabor Forrai (2009). Brandom on Two Problems of Conceptual Role Semantics. In Barbara Merker (ed.), Vertehen nach Heidegger und Brandom.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-08-11Total downloads31 ( #39,249 of 548,969 )Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,799 of 548,969 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
