Abstract

Michael Della Rocca has claimed that using intuitions expressed in everyday language for philosophical purposes leads to a “taming of philosophy.” The present article uses an aspect of Christian Wolff's arguments from common notions as a test case for this claim. It is argued that arguments from common linguistic usage in Wolff's analysis of imputation allow for reasoned choices between competing philosophical theories and provide insights into aspects of social reality that are expressed in common notions. This is so because Wolff does not analyze everyday concepts one by one but rather explores their mutual connections.