Carnapian Explication and the Canberra Plan’s Conceptual Analysis: a Comparison and Critique

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Conceptual analysis has been a traditional methodology within analytic philosophy, but it also has been the target of numerous attacks. On the other hand, explication has been undergoing a revival as a methodological alternative due to the revisionary element associated with it. This allows for a scientific reconstruction of our ordinary notions, which would share virtues associated with scientific concepts. However, there is now a popular variant of conceptual analysis which resembles closely the explicative methodology: the two-step methodology advanced by the advocates of the Canberra Plan. Although explication is a wider and more ambitious program, I will argue that both methodologies can be regarded as attempts to bring philosophical methodology and its products closer to scientific ones. However, I will also point out that, although the goal is advantageous, there still remain some theoretical problems.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
First archival date: 2019-10-11
Latest version: 2 (2020-03-15)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Concepts and Conceptual Analysis.Laurence, Stephen & Margolis, Eric

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
60 ( #37,966 of 47,298 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
60 ( #12,299 of 47,298 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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