File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1007/s11229-019-02096-x
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85060683995
- WOS: WOS:000644649500003
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Conceptual engineering, truth, and efficacy
Title | Conceptual engineering, truth, and efficacy |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Conceptual engineering Conceptual analysis Intuition Explication |
Issue Date | 2021 |
Publisher | Springer Verlag Dordrecht. The Journal's web site is located at http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=journal&issn=0039-7857 |
Citation | Synthese, 2021, v. 198, p. 1507-1527 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Traditional views on philosophical methodology characterize our primary philosophical goal as production of a successful conceptual analysis. The notion of conceptual analysis, however, faces several challenges—from experimental philosophy to more traditional worries such as the paradox of analysis. This paper explores an alternate approach, commonly called conceptual engineering, which aims at recommending conceptual revisions. An important question for the conceptual engineer is as follows: what counts as a case of successful conceptual engineering? What sorts of revisions are permitted, and what sorts are too revisionary? In this paper I examine ‘functional’ approaches to conceptual engineering, ultimately arguing for a ‘radical’ functionalism according to which even revisions which ‘change the subject’ are permitted, and successful re-engineering is constrained only by the requirement that continuity in needed functions of a pre-engineering concept be maintained somewhere in the postengineering conceptual scheme. I further argue that this approach suggests a heightened role, in metaphilosophical discourse, for a neglected epistemic goal—conceptual efficacy. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/273204 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 1.3 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.932 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Nado, J | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-08-06T09:24:28Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2019-08-06T09:24:28Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2021 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Synthese, 2021, v. 198, p. 1507-1527 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0039-7857 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/273204 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Traditional views on philosophical methodology characterize our primary philosophical goal as production of a successful conceptual analysis. The notion of conceptual analysis, however, faces several challenges—from experimental philosophy to more traditional worries such as the paradox of analysis. This paper explores an alternate approach, commonly called conceptual engineering, which aims at recommending conceptual revisions. An important question for the conceptual engineer is as follows: what counts as a case of successful conceptual engineering? What sorts of revisions are permitted, and what sorts are too revisionary? In this paper I examine ‘functional’ approaches to conceptual engineering, ultimately arguing for a ‘radical’ functionalism according to which even revisions which ‘change the subject’ are permitted, and successful re-engineering is constrained only by the requirement that continuity in needed functions of a pre-engineering concept be maintained somewhere in the postengineering conceptual scheme. I further argue that this approach suggests a heightened role, in metaphilosophical discourse, for a neglected epistemic goal—conceptual efficacy. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | Springer Verlag Dordrecht. The Journal's web site is located at http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=journal&issn=0039-7857 | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Synthese | - |
dc.rights | This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in [insert journal title]. The final authenticated version is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/[insert DOI] | - |
dc.subject | Conceptual engineering | - |
dc.subject | Conceptual analysis | - |
dc.subject | Intuition | - |
dc.subject | Explication | - |
dc.title | Conceptual engineering, truth, and efficacy | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.email | Nado, J: nado@hku.hk | - |
dc.identifier.authority | Nado, J=rp02287 | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s11229-019-02096-x | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85060683995 | - |
dc.identifier.hkuros | 300319 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 198 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 1507 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 1527 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000644649500003 | - |
dc.publisher.place | Netherlands | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0039-7857 | - |