Downplaying the change of subject objection to conceptual engineering.

Conceptual engineering projects have been criticized for creating discontinuities of subject-matter and, as a result, discontinuities in inquiries: call this the Change of Subject objection. In this paper, I explore a way of dealing with the objection that clarifies its scope and eventually downplay...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Inquiry Vol. 68; no. 9; pp. 2942 - 2966
Main Author: Belleri, Delia
Format: Article
Published: Taylor & Francis Ltd Oct2025
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=188286065&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 188286065
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        0020174X
        B8P
      jtl: Inquiry
      issn: 0020174X
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2025
      vid: 68
      iid: 9
      pid: 377
      pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd
    artinfo:
      ui:
        188286065
        10.1080/0020174X.2021.1908161
      ppf: 2942
      ppct: 24
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Downplaying the change of subject objection to conceptual engineering.
      aug:
        au: Belleri, Delia
        affil: LanCog, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
      su:
        Semantics methodology
        Conceptual design
        Philosophers
      sug:
        subj:
          Semantics methodology
          Conceptual design
          Philosophers
      keyword:
        change of subject
        concepts
        Conceptual engineering
        function
        inquiry
        topic
      ab: Conceptual engineering projects have been criticized for creating discontinuities of subject-matter and, as a result, discontinuities in inquiries: call this the Change of Subject objection. In this paper, I explore a way of dealing with the objection that clarifies its scope and eventually downplays it. First, two strategies aimed at saving subject-continuity are examined and found wanting: Herman Cappelen's appeal to topics, and the account in terms of concept function. Second, the idea is introduced that one can begin an object-level inquiry either with a 'semantically conservative' approach, whereby semantic change is not permitted, or with a 'semantically progressive' approach, whereby semantic change is permitted. This distinction helps one significantly downplay the Change of Subject objection.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2025
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N