Reconstructing Intersubjective Norms
Robert Brandom famously attempts to provide an account of norms that are grounded in intersubjective practices, so dealing with problems raised by Wittgenstein’s regress arguments. This relies upon providing an explanation of the correctness of those practices in terms of our dispositions to treat...
Guardado en:
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | article |
Lenguaje: | EN FR IT |
Publicado: |
Rosenberg & Sellier
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/3638b27bf4d2465d8b55b2dcf9892c4c |
Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
id |
oai:doaj.org-article:3638b27bf4d2465d8b55b2dcf9892c4c |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:3638b27bf4d2465d8b55b2dcf9892c4c2021-12-02T12:19:25ZReconstructing Intersubjective Norms10.13128/Phe_Mi-224402280-78532239-4028https://doaj.org/article/3638b27bf4d2465d8b55b2dcf9892c4c2017-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://oaj.fupress.net/index.php/pam/article/view/7300https://doaj.org/toc/2280-7853https://doaj.org/toc/2239-4028 Robert Brandom famously attempts to provide an account of norms that are grounded in intersubjective practices, so dealing with problems raised by Wittgenstein’s regress arguments. This relies upon providing an explanation of the correctness of those practices in terms of our dispositions to treat each other’s practices as correct or incorrect. The view faces a number of hurdles, however, particularly when it comes to providing a non-circular account of the norms of practice, from within those practices themselves. This essay argues that Brandom’s attempt to ground norms in intersubjective practices is circular, and requires communal stability. I go on to suggest that, by taking practices of interaction as foundational, we can ground norms in action coordination. Norms, on this view, become sedimented through our interactions, and explicit normative talk is required to keep our interactions coherent with each other. James TraffordRosenberg & SellierarticlenormsintersubjectiveinteractionAestheticsBH1-301EthicsBJ1-1725ENFRITPhenomenology and Mind, Iss 13 (2017) |
institution |
DOAJ |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
EN FR IT |
topic |
norms intersubjective interaction Aesthetics BH1-301 Ethics BJ1-1725 |
spellingShingle |
norms intersubjective interaction Aesthetics BH1-301 Ethics BJ1-1725 James Trafford Reconstructing Intersubjective Norms |
description |
Robert Brandom famously attempts to provide an account of norms that are grounded in intersubjective practices, so dealing with problems raised by Wittgenstein’s regress arguments. This relies upon providing an explanation of the correctness of those practices in terms of our dispositions to treat each other’s practices as correct or incorrect. The view faces a number of hurdles, however, particularly when it comes to providing a non-circular account of the norms of practice, from within those practices themselves. This essay argues that Brandom’s attempt to ground norms in intersubjective practices is circular, and requires communal stability. I go on to suggest that, by taking practices of interaction as foundational, we can ground norms in action coordination. Norms, on this view, become sedimented through our interactions, and explicit normative talk is required to keep our interactions coherent with each other.
|
format |
article |
author |
James Trafford |
author_facet |
James Trafford |
author_sort |
James Trafford |
title |
Reconstructing Intersubjective Norms |
title_short |
Reconstructing Intersubjective Norms |
title_full |
Reconstructing Intersubjective Norms |
title_fullStr |
Reconstructing Intersubjective Norms |
title_full_unstemmed |
Reconstructing Intersubjective Norms |
title_sort |
reconstructing intersubjective norms |
publisher |
Rosenberg & Sellier |
publishDate |
2017 |
url |
https://doaj.org/article/3638b27bf4d2465d8b55b2dcf9892c4c |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT jamestrafford reconstructingintersubjectivenorms |
_version_ |
1718394506886250496 |