Verbal disputes and topic continuity

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Changing concepts comes with a risk of creating merely verbal disputes. Accounts of topic continuity (such as Herman Cappelen’s) are supposed to solve this problem. As this paper shows, however, no existing solution avoids the danger of mere verbalness. On the contrary, accounts of topic continuity in fact increase the danger of overlooking merely verbal disputes between pre- and post-ameliorators. Ultimately, this paper suggests accepting the danger of mere verbalness resulting from a change in topic as a downside of conceptual engineering. Changing the topic under discussion may be worth the risk, however, in many cases. In fact, this paper proposes that the main goal of conceptual engineering should be seen as changing topics for the better.
Categories
PhilPapers/Archive ID
KNOVDA
Upload history
Archival date: 2021-01-28
View other versions
Added to PP index
2021-01-28

Total views
163 ( #35,530 of 64,083 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
95 ( #6,502 of 64,083 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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