Philosophical Studies 176 (11):3099-3119 (2019)

Authors
Alex Worsnip
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Abstract
Despite increasing prominence, ‘ought’-contextualism is regarded with suspicion by most metaethicists. As I’ll argue, however, contextualism is a very weak claim, that every metaethicist can sign up to. The real controversy concerns how contextualism is developed. I then draw an oft-overlooked distinction between “parochial” contextualism—on which the contextually-relevant standards are those that the speaker, or others in her environment, subscribe to—and “aspirational” contextualism—on which the contextually-relevant standards are the objective standards for the relevant domain. However, I argue that neither view is acceptable. I suggest an original compromise: “ecumenical contextualism”, on which some uses of ‘ought’ are parochial, others aspirational. Ecumenical contextualism is compatible with realism or antirealism, but either combination yields interesting results. And though it’s a cognitivist view, it is strengthened by incorporating an expressivist insight: for robustly normative usages of ‘ought’, the contextually-relevant standards must be endorsed by the speaker.
Keywords Contextualism  Deontic modals  Semantics of 'ought'  Expressivism  Internalism
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11098-018-1165-9
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

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

Demonstratives: An Essay on the Semantics, Logic, Metaphysics and Epistemology of Demonstratives and Other Indexicals.David Kaplan - 1989 - In Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard Wettstein (eds.), Themes From Kaplan. Oxford University Press. pp. 481-563.
Knowledge and Lotteries.John Hawthorne - 2003 - Oxford University Press.
The Nature of Normativity.Ralph Wedgwood - 2007 - Oxford University Press.

View all 47 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Disagreement as Interpersonal Incoherence.Alex Worsnip - 2019 - Res Philosophica 96 (2):245-268.
Rationality, Reasoning Well, and Extramental Props.Wade Munroe - 2019 - Res Philosophica 96 (2):175-198.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Contextualism and Knowledge Norms.Alex Worsnip - 2017 - In Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Contextualism. Routledge. pp. 177-189.
Varieties of Contextualism: Standards and Descriptions.Peter Baumann - 2005 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 69 (1):229-246.
From Epistemic Contextualism to Epistemic Expressivism.Matthew Chrisman - 2007 - Philosophical Studies 135 (2):225-254.
Discourse Contextualism.J. L. Dowell - 2018 - Analysis 78 (3):562-566.
Contextualism and Context Internalism.David Coss - 2017 - Logos and Episteme 8 (4):417-423.
Defending Standards Contextualism.Robert Hudson - 2015 - Logos and Episteme 6 (1): 35-59.
Relevant Alternatives, Contextualism Included.Ernest Sosa - 2004 - Philosophical Studies 119 (1-2):35-65.
Contextualism About 'Might' and Says-That Ascriptions.David Braun - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 164 (2):485-511.
Epistemic Contextualism and Linguistic Behavior.Wesley Buckwalter - 2017 - In Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Contextualism. New York: Routledge. pp. 44-56.
Virtues, Social Roles, and Contextualism.Sarah Wright - 2010 - Metaphilosophy 41 (1-2):95-114.
Contextualism: An Explanation and Defense.Keith DeRose - 1998 - In J. Greco & E. Sosa (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to Epistemology. Blackwell. pp. 187--205.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-09-04

Total views
261 ( #28,279 of 2,326,559 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
60 ( #9,508 of 2,326,559 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes