'You're changing the subject': An unfair objection to conceptual engineering?
Conceptual engineering projects are sometimes criticized for 'changing the subject'. In this paper, I first discuss three strategies that have been proposed to address the change of subject objection. I notice that these strategies fail in similar ways: they all deploy a 'loose' notion of subject ma...
| Publicado en: | Philosophical Quarterly Vol. 75; no. 3; pp. 858 - 878 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Oxford University Press / USA
Jul2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=186062022&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 186062022 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00318094 PHQ jtl: Philosophical Quarterly issn: 00318094 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jul2025 vid: 75 iid: 3 pid: 622 pub: Oxford University Press / USA artinfo: ui: 186062022 10.1093/pq/pqae031 ppf: 858 ppct: 20 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 430KB tig: atl: 'You're changing the subject': An unfair objection to conceptual engineering? aug: au: Belleri, Delia affil: LanCog, Centre of Philosophy, University of Lisbon, Portugal su: Concept learning Semantics Dialectic Philosophical analysis Cappelen, Herman sug: subj: Concept learning Semantics Dialectic Philosophical analysis Cappelen, Herman keyword: concepts conceptual engineering dialectic revision subject change subject matter ab: Conceptual engineering projects are sometimes criticized for 'changing the subject'. In this paper, I first discuss three strategies that have been proposed to address the change of subject objection. I notice that these strategies fail in similar ways: they all deploy a 'loose' notion of subject matter, while the objector can always reply deploying a 'strict' notion. Based on this, I then argue that at least current formulations of the change of subject objection (together with the response strategies just mentioned), create an overall defective dialectic , whereby no progress can be made on either side. After considering how such defective dialectic could be (at least partly) fixed, it is concluded that current formulations of the change of subject objection may be dismissed on dialectical grounds , even though some practical lessons may still be retained from the objection. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: © 2019 Scots Philosophical Association and the University of St. Andrews. item: Philosophical Quarterly holder: Oxford University Press / USA dt: @attributes: year: 2025 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|