Abstract
This paper continues a debate on the normative limits of conceptual engineering. In particular, it responds to [Isaac, Manuel Gustavo. 2021. “Post-truth conceptual engineering.” Inquiry. doi:10.1080/0020174X.2021.1887758] claim, in response to [Simion, Mona. 2018a. “The ‘Should’ in Conceptual Engineering.” Inquiry 61(8): 914–928 and Podosky, Paul-Mikhail Catapang. 2018. “Ideology and Normativity: Constraints on Conceptual Engineering.” Inquiry. doi:10.1080/0020174X.2018.1562374], but in particular Podosky, that cognitive efficacy, rather than truth and knowledge, should be the normative standard by which we assess the legitimacy of a conceptual engineering project – at least for ideological concepts. I argue that Isaac has not done enough to show us that truth and knowledge are insignificant for the conceptual engineering of ideological concepts.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1956-1966 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Inquiry |
| Volume | 69 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| Early online date | 19 May 2022 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2026 |
Keywords
- conceptual engineering
- ideology
- representationalism
- social constructionism
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Don't count truth out just yet: a response to Isaac'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver