Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The inference from 'ought'-statements to meaning statemen... — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The inference from 'ought'-statements to meaning statements is questionable

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Humean fact-value gaps apply within normative domains: an 'ought' governing use can be grounded in etiquette, logic, or semantics without distinguishing which.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Allan Gibbard's norm-expressivism shows that 'ought'-statements express acceptance of norms from any domain, not specifically semantic norms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without a principled criterion distinguishing semantic 'oughts' from practical or social ones, inferring meaning from 'ought'-statements commits a category error.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kripke's Wittgenstein shows that any normative rule admits multiple interpretations, making the step from 'ought' to determinate meaning underdetermined.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'ought' underdetermines which semantic rule is operative, then inferring a specific meaning from an 'ought'-statement requires an independent account of content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Even if 'green' ought to be applied in a certain way, the 'ought' in question may not concern semantics
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The 'ought' might instead concern something else, such as religious practices
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Related

    Allan Gibbard's norm-expressivism shows that 'ought'-statements express acceptan...Even if 'green' ought to be applied in a certain way, the 'ought' in question ma...Humean fact-value gaps apply within normative domains: an 'ought' governing use ...If 'ought' underdetermines which semantic rule is operative, then inferring a sp...
    +3 moreShow less
    Kripke's Wittgenstein shows that any normative rule admits multiple interpretati...The 'ought' might instead concern something else, such as religious practicesWithout a principled criterion distinguishing semantic 'oughts' from practical o...

    Similar

    An analysis of 'ought' that eliminates genuine contradiction between s...85%If 'ought' is indexed to what a given agent believes to be good, then ...80%The argument slips between 'ought' (normative) and 'will' (descriptive...79%The appearance of an 'ought' tied to understanding derives from added ...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: meaning-normativity
    View source passageHide passage
    If the suggestion is that meaning statements have a prescriptive content it would provide another very direct argument in support of ME normativity, one that does not have to proceed via the controversial claim that the notion of semantic correctness is an essentially normative notion. This is an advantage over the simple argument. However, there are also disadvantages. For instance, the question arises whether the claim that meaning statements lack descriptive content can accommodate the role o
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit