Authors
Megan Henricks Stotts
McMaster University
Abstract
Unrecognized conventions—practices that are conventional even though their participants do not recognize them as such—play central roles in shaping our lives. They range from the indispensable (e.g. unrecognized linguistic conventions) to the insidious (e.g. some of our gender conventions). Unrecognized conventions pose a challenge for accounts of conventions because it is difficult to incorporate the distinctive arbitrariness of conventions—the fact that conventions always have alternatives—without accidentally excluding many unrecognized conventions. I develop an Accessibility Requirement that allows us to account for both arbitrariness and unrecognized conventions. Specifically, I argue that a conventional practice must have at least one alternative that is at least approximately as good and at least approximately as accessible as the conventional practice itself, independent of the dominance the practice gained as it became conventional. In the course of arguing for this requirement, I also show that two prominent accounts of conventions, David Lewis’s and Ruth Garrett Millikan’s, run into problems with capturing the arbitrariness of conventions. The Accessibility Requirement opens the door to improved accounts of conventions by precisely identifying the way in which conventions are arbitrary.
Keywords convention  David Lewis  Ruth Garrett Millikan
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2016, 2017
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1080/0020174x.2016.1140072
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: 63,375
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Linguistic Behaviour.Jonathan Bennett - 1976 - Cambridge University Press.
Meaning.Stephen Schiffer - 1972 - Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Languages and Language.David K. Lewis - 1975 - In Keith Gunderson (ed.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. University of Minnesota Press. pp. 3-35.

View all 23 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

How to Be a Conventional Person.Kristie Miller - 2004 - The Monist 87 (4):457-474.
Social Conventions: From Language to Law.Andrei Marmor - 2009 - Princeton University Press.
Are Language Conventions Philosophically Explanatory?Adele Mercier - 2003 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 3 (2):111-124.
Conventions and Their Role in Language.M. J. Cain - 2013 - Philosophia 41 (1):137-158.
Norms and Conventions.Nicholas Southwood & Lina Eriksson - 2011 - Philosophical Explorations 14 (2):195 - 217.
Conventions Made Too Simple?Martin Bunzl & Richard Kreuter - 2003 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 33 (4):417-426.
On Convention.Andrei Marmor - 1996 - Synthese 107 (3):349 - 371.
Language Conventions Made Simple.Ruth Garrett Millikan - 1998 - Journal of Philosophy 95 (4):161-180.
Knowing Linguistic Conventions.Carin Robinson - 2014 - South African Journal of Philosophy 33 (2):167-176.
Demonstrative Without Descriptive Conventions.S. C. Coval - 1965 - Philosophy 40 (154):334 - 343.
The Normativity of Lewis Conventions.Francesco Guala - 2013 - Synthese 190 (15):3107-3122.
Games, Rules, and Conventions.William J. Morgan - 2014 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 44 (3):383-401.
The Problem of Lexical Innovation.Josh Armstrong - 2016 - Linguistics and Philosophy 39 (2):87-118.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-03-11

Total views
47 ( #227,276 of 2,448,957 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #299,896 of 2,448,957 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes