Confusion of Tongues: A Theory of Normative Language, by Stephen Finlay [Book Review]

Ethics 127 (1):281-288 (2016)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Stephen Finlay’s Confusion of Tongues is a bold and sophisticated book. The overarching goal is metaphysical: to reductively analyze normative facts, properties, and relations in terms of non-normative facts, properties, and relations. But the method is linguistic: to first provide a reductive analysis of the corresponding bits of normative language, with a particular focus on ‘good’, ‘ought’, and ‘reason’. The gap between language and reality is then bridged by taking linguistic analysis as a guide to conceptual analysis, and conceptual analysis as a guide to metaphysical analysis. In this review, I consider three challenges to Finlay’s project that deserve more attention than they receive in the book. The first concerns Finlay’s claim to have provided a *reductive* theory of normative language, the second concerns his claim to have provided a *unified* theory of normative language, and the third concerns his claim to have provided a *correct* theory of normative language.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
FOGCOT
Upload history
Archival date: 2016-06-13
View other versions
Added to PP index
2016-06-13

Total views
313 ( #15,330 of 52,923 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
32 ( #20,260 of 52,923 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.