Neutralism and Conceptual Engineering

In Alexis Burgess, Herman Cappelen & David Plunkett (eds.), Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press (forthcoming)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Conceptual Engineering alleges that philosophical problems are best treated via revising or replacing our concepts (or words). The goal here is not to defend Conceptual Engineering but rather show that it can (and should) invoke Neutralism—the broad view that philosophical progress can take place when (and sometimes only when) a thoroughly neutral, non-specific theory, treatment, or methodology is adopted. A neutralist treatment of one form of skepticism is used as a case study and is compared with various non-neutral rivals. Along the way, a new taxonomy for paradox is proposed.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
GRENAC-4
Upload history
First archival date: 2018-02-13
Latest version: 2 (2018-03-27)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2018-02-13

Total views
456 ( #10,187 of 53,644 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
52 ( #12,056 of 53,644 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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