• Publications
  • Influence
Disagreement and the Semantics of Normative and Evaluative Terms
© 2013 David Plunkett & Tim Sundell This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. Introduction.1 In The Language of Morals, R.M. Hare introducesExpand
  • 149
  • 11
  • PDF
Disagreements about taste
I argue for the possibility of substantive aesthetic disagreements in which both parties speak truly. The possibility of such disputes undermines an argument mobilized by relativists such asExpand
  • 119
  • 10
DWORKIN'S INTERPRETIVISM AND THE PRAGMATICS OF LEGAL DISPUTES*
One of Ronald Dworkin's most distinctive claims in legal philosophy is that law is an interpretative concept, a special kind of concept whose correct application depends neither on fixed criteria norExpand
  • 22
  • 1
  • PDF
The tasty, the bold, and the beautiful
Abstract I call into question a pair of closely related assumptions that are almost universally shared in the literature on predicates of taste. The assumptions are, first, that predicates of taste –Expand
  • 7
  • 1
Disagreement, Error, and an Alternative to Reference Magnetism
Lewisian reference magnetism about linguistic content determination [Lewis 1983 has been defended in recent work by Weatherson [2003] and Sider [2009], among others. Two advantages claimed for theExpand
  • 18
Antipositivist Arguments from Legal Thought and Talk: The Metalinguistic Response
One reason that many people are drawn to some form of legal anti positivism stems from a simple observation about legal thought and talk. The obser­ vation is this: when legal actors argue in legalExpand
  • 16
  • PDF
Metalinguistic negotiation and speaker error
ABSTRACT In recent work, we have argued that a number of disputes of interest to philosophers – including some disputes amongst philosophers themselves – are metalinguistic negotiations. Prima facie,Expand
  • 4
  • PDF
Changing the Subject
Abstract In Fixing Language, Herman Cappelen defends the project of conceptual engineering from a family of objections that he calls “the Strawsonian challenges.” Those objections are all versions ofExpand
Conflict and *content