Conceptual Engineering or Revisionary Conceptual Analysis? The Case of Russell's Metaphilosophy Based on Principia Mathematica's Logic

Bibliographic Data

ID9687689
AuthorsLandon Elkind (0000-0003-0513-2937, Western Kentucky University, corresponding author)
Year2021
Volume60
Issue3
Pages447-474
Publication date2021-12-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueDialogue (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0012-2173 • E-ISSN: 1759-0949
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0012217321000317
OpenAlexW4226347402
LanguageEN
References cited27

Conceptual engineers have made hay over the differences of their metaphilosophy from those of conceptual analysts. In this article, I argue that the differences are not as great as conceptual engineers have, perhaps rhetorically, made them seem. That is, conceptual analysts asking ‘What is X ?’ questions can do much the same work that conceptual engineers can do with ‘What is X for?’ questions, at least if conceptual analysts self-understand their activity as a revisionary enterprise. I show this with a study of Russell's metaphilosophy, which was just such a revisionary conception of conceptual analysis

Art history · Conceptual framework · Conceptual schema · Epistemology · Linguistics · Metaphilosophy · Performance art · The Conceptual Framework · Western philosophy · History · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Philosophy and Theoretical Science · Philosophy, Science, and History

Tools

Open DOI