Verbal Disputes and Deep Conceptual Disagreements
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20205915 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Daniel Cohnitz (0000-0001-5958-8572, Utrecht University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 279-294 |
| Publication date | 2020-08-27 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Trames Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1406-0922 • E-ISSN: 1736-7514 |
| Publisher | Estonian Academy Publishers (PUBLISHER • EE) |
| DOI | 10.3176/tr.2020.3.02 |
| OpenAlex | W3082990189 |
| Language | EN |
To say that a philosophical dispute is â merely verbalâ seems to be an important diagnosis. If that diagnosis is correct for a particular dispute, then the right thing to do would be to declare that dispute to be over. The topic of what the disputing parties were fighting over was just a pseudo-problem (thus not really a problem), or at least â if there is a sense in which also merely verbal disputes indicate some problem, for example, insufficient clarity of terminology â this problem is not substantial, or not as substantial as the disputing parties believed their problem initially to be. In this paper I will try to clarify what it means if we diagnose that two arguing parties are having a merely verbal dispute
Cognitive psychology · Cognitive science · Political science · Child and Animal Learning Development · Psychology · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |