Philosophical Review 120 (4):515-566 (2011)

Authors
David Chalmers
New York University
Abstract
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)
DOI 10.1215/00318108-1334478
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,981
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Logical Foundations of Probability.Rudolf Carnap - 1950 - Chicago]University of Chicago Press.
Individualism and the Mental.Tyler Burge - 1979 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 4 (1):73-122.

View all 60 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Are women adult human females?Alex Byrne - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 177 (12):3783-3803.
A Guided Tour Of Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics.David Plunkett & Herman Cappelen - 2020 - In Herman Cappelen, David Plunkett & Alexis Burgess (eds.), Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 1-26.
Uniqueness and Metaepistemology.Daniel Greco & Brian Hedden - 2016 - Journal of Philosophy 113 (8):365-395.
Which Concepts Should We Use?: Metalinguistic Negotiations and The Methodology of Philosophy.David Plunkett - 2015 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 58 (7-8):828-874.

View all 118 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Method of Verbal Dispute.Alan Sidelle - 2007 - Philosophical Topics 35 (1/2):83-113.
Merely Verbal Disputes.C. S. I. Jenkins - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (S1):11-30.
Is the Hirsch–Sider Dispute Merely Verbal?Gerald Marsh - 2010 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (3):459-469.
Physical-Object Ontology, Verbal Disputes, and Common Sense.Eli Hirsch - 2005 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (1):67–97.
Composition, Colocation, and Metaontology.Karen Bennett - 2009 - In David John Chalmers, David Manley & Ryan Wasserman (eds.), Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford University Press. pp. 38.
Spory rzeczowe i słowne.Anna Brożek - 2012 - Filozofia Nauki 20 (4).
The "Tip of the Tongue" Phenomenon.R. Brown & David N. McNeill - 1966 - Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 5:325-37.
The Structure of Predication.Alessandro Lenci - 1998 - Synthese 114 (2):233-276.
On the Concept of Sexual Perversion.Kristie Miller - 2010 - Philosophical Quarterly 60 (241):808-830.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-09-24

Total views
1,373 ( #2,812 of 2,427,422 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
74 ( #9,713 of 2,427,422 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes