Rosen's distinction between 'could be construed normatively' and 'needs a normative construal' presupposes a sharp metaphysical/conceptual divide that quietists like Wittgenstein deny is principled.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Rosen(as the philosopher whose distinction is being discussed): Gideon Rosen is a contemporary philosopher who works on metaphysics and metaethics—basically, he thinks deeply about what exists and whether moral facts are real.
Wittgenstein: Ludwig Wittgenstein was an Austrian-British philosopher who fundamentally changed how people think about language and meaning in the 20th century. He argued that many philosophical problems arise from misunderstanding how words actually work in everyday life, rather than from deep metaphysical mysteries. His ideas influenced not just philosophy but also mathematics, logic, and even how people approach psychology and artificial intelligence today.
construed(as used to explain how we typically understand complexity in human-made objects): Interpreted or understood in a particular way.
metaphysical/conceptual divide(as a distinction that some philosophers think is real and foundational): A sharp separation between two kinds of things: what exists in reality (metaphysical) versus the ideas and categories we use to think about things (conceptual).

Based on where you are in your exploration