摘要: According to Normativism, what an expression means has immediate implications for how a subject should or may (not) employ that expression. Many view this thesis as imposing substantive constraints upon theories of linguistic meaning. In paper, I shall not consider view; instead, address the prior issue whether one accept Normativism. Against certain recent prominent lines attack common number different anti-Normativist discussions, defend both Normativist and attempt appeal platitude in its support.
core.ac.uk
philpapers.org
sci-hub.se 参考文章(19)
H Glock, The normativity of meaning made simple Mentis. ,(2005)
Martin Kusch, A Sceptical Guide to Meaning and Rules: Defending Kripke's Wittgenstein ,(2006)
Alan Millar (Ph. D.), Understanding People: Normativity and Rationalizing Explanation ,(2004)
Ralph Wedgwood, The Nature of Normativity ,(2007)
STEPHEN DARWALL, Desires, Reasons, and Causes Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. ,vol. 67, pp. 436- 443 ,(2003) , 10.1111/J.1933-1592.2003.TB00300.X
K. Gluer, A. Wikforss, Against Content Normativity Mind. ,vol. 118, pp. 31- 70 ,(2009) , 10.1093/MIND/FZN154
Crispin Wright, Realism, meaning, and truth ,(1987)
Simon Robertson, Not so enticing reasons Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. ,vol. 11, pp. 263- 277 ,(2008) , 10.1007/S10677-007-9091-5
Paul Boghossian, Is Meaning Normative Mind & Language. ,vol. 21, pp. 220- 240 ,(2006) , 10.1111/J.0268-1064.2006.00312.X
PAUL A. BOGHOSSIAN, The rule-following considerations Mind. ,vol. 98, pp. 507- 549 ,(1989) , 10.1093/MIND/XCVIII.392.507