语义规范的结构

IF 0.6 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Jeffrey Kaplan
{"title":"语义规范的结构","authors":"Jeffrey Kaplan","doi":"10.1111/phib.12262","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The normativity of meaning—introduced by Kripke in 1982, and the subject of active debate since the early 1990s—has been exclusively understood in terms of duty-imposing norms. But there are norms of another type, well-known within the philosophy of law: authority-conferring norms. Philosophers thinking and writing about the normativity of meaning—normativists, anti-normativists, and even Kripke himself—seem to have failed to consider the possibility that semantic norms are authority-conferring. I argue that semantic norms should be understood as having an authority-conferring structure, and show how this allows normativism about meaning to escape the two most popular arguments against it.</p>","PeriodicalId":45646,"journal":{"name":"Analytic Philosophy","volume":"64 4","pages":"373-391"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The structure of semantic norms\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey Kaplan\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/phib.12262\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The normativity of meaning—introduced by Kripke in 1982, and the subject of active debate since the early 1990s—has been exclusively understood in terms of duty-imposing norms. But there are norms of another type, well-known within the philosophy of law: authority-conferring norms. Philosophers thinking and writing about the normativity of meaning—normativists, anti-normativists, and even Kripke himself—seem to have failed to consider the possibility that semantic norms are authority-conferring. I argue that semantic norms should be understood as having an authority-conferring structure, and show how this allows normativism about meaning to escape the two most popular arguments against it.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Analytic Philosophy\",\"volume\":\"64 4\",\"pages\":\"373-391\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Analytic Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/phib.12262\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytic Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/phib.12262","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

意义的规范性——由Kripke于1982年提出,自20世纪90年代初以来一直是积极辩论的主题——被完全理解为责任强加规范。但还有另一种规范,在法律哲学中众所周知:赋予权力的规范。思考和写作意义规范性的哲学家——规范主义者、反规范主义者,甚至克里普克本人——似乎都没有考虑到语义规范赋予权威的可能性。我认为,语义规范应该被理解为具有赋予权威的结构,并说明这如何使关于意义的规范主义逃脱了两种最流行的反对它的论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The structure of semantic norms

The normativity of meaning—introduced by Kripke in 1982, and the subject of active debate since the early 1990s—has been exclusively understood in terms of duty-imposing norms. But there are norms of another type, well-known within the philosophy of law: authority-conferring norms. Philosophers thinking and writing about the normativity of meaning—normativists, anti-normativists, and even Kripke himself—seem to have failed to consider the possibility that semantic norms are authority-conferring. I argue that semantic norms should be understood as having an authority-conferring structure, and show how this allows normativism about meaning to escape the two most popular arguments against it.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Analytic Philosophy
Analytic Philosophy PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信