Disability studies, conceptual engineering, and conceptual activism

Cantalamessa, Elizabeth Amber

doi:10.1080/0020174x.2019.1658630

Cited by 20 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One way for the putative conceptual engineer to proceed is to use the concept as if it already had the meaning it would have post-amelioration, and to interpret other concept users as if they are using the concept in ways that align with the ameliorative proposal in question. For instance, if asked about the 24 See also Cantalamessa (2019) for relevant discussion. kindest person they know, they could mention their pet gerbil.…”

Section: Methodological Implications Of Rational Conceptual Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rational conceptual conflict and the implementation problem

Gibbons

2022

Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conceptual engineers endeavor to improve our stock of concepts. But their endeavors face serious practical difficulties. One such difficultyrational conceptual conflict -concerns the degree to which agents are incentivized to impede the efforts of conceptual engineers, especially in many of the contexts within which conceptual engineering is viewed as a worthwhile pursuit.Under such conditions, the already difficult task of conceptual engineering becomes even more difficult. Consequently, if they want to increase their chances of success, conceptual engineers should pay closer attention toand devise strategies to mitigaterational conceptual conflict.After outlining the phenomenon at greater length and mapping its connections to other similar practical problems (Section 1), I explore the dynamics of such conflict by way of several detailed case studies (Section 2). In particular, I focus on cases driven by material, social, and moral incentives. I then consider some important methodological implications of rational conceptual conflict (Section 3). Among other things, I argue that conceptual engineers should focus more heavily on cultivating settings that modify the payoffs and penalties associated with conceptual conflict. By such indirect means, they can incentivize conceptual cooperation rather than conflict, thus making it easier to achieve success in conceptual engineering. Section 4 concludes.

show abstract

Section: Methodological Implications Of Rational Conceptual Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rational conceptual conflict and the implementation problem

Gibbons

2022

Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first alternative is a general one that consists of two opposite options: On the one hand, the principled views , which take conceptual engineering to be about some specified representational devices (viz., concepts, linguistic meanings, lexical items, conceptions, speaker-meanings, etc. ); and on the other hand, the unprincipled views which, building on anti-foundationalism (be it implicitly or not), take conceptual engineering to be about any kind of representational device more or less indistinctly, that is, with no need for further specification (e.g., Burgess 2020; Burgess and Plunkett 2020;Cantalamessa 2019;Nado 2019;Prinzing 2018;Sterken 2020;Tanswell 2018).…”

Section: Taxonomizing the Subject Mattermentioning

confidence: 99%

What Should Conceptual Engineering Be All About?

Isaac

2021

Philosophia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conceptual engineering is commonly characterized as the method for assessing and improving our representational devices. Little has been said, however, on how best to construe these representational devices—in other words, on what conceptual engineering should be all about. This paper tackles this problem with a basic strategy: First, by presenting a taxonomy of the different possible subject matters for conceptual engineering; then, by comparatively assessing them and selecting the most conducive one with a view to making conceptual engineering an actionable method, that is, a method that can be applied effectively and consistently to specific case studies. The outcome is that conceptual engineering should be all about concepts on pain of pragmatic inconsistencies otherwise.

show abstract

“…The first alternative is a general one that consists of two options: On the one hand, the principled views on which conceptual engineering is taken to target some specified representational devices (viz., concepts, linguistic meanings, lexical items, subject matters, etc. ); and on the other hand, the unprincipled views on which conceptual engineering may well target any kind of representational device more or less indistinctly, that is, with no real need of further specification (e.g., Burgess, 2020; Burgess & Plunkett, 2013, 2020; Cantalamessa, 2021; Nado, 2021; Prinzing, 2018; Sterken, 2020; Tanswell, 2018).…”

Section: The Main Foundational Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

Broad‐spectrum conceptual engineering

Isaac

2021

Ratio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conceptual engineering is the method for assessing and improving our representational devices. On its ‘broad‐spectrum’ version, it is expected to be appropriately applicable to any of our representation‐involving cognitive activities, with major consequences for our whole cognitive life. This paper is about the theoretical foundations of conceptual engineering thus characterised. With a view to ensuring the actionability of conceptual engineering as a broad‐spectrum method, it addresses the issue of how best to construe the subject matter of conceptual engineering and successively defends the theses that conceptual engineering should be: (i) About concepts, (ii) psychologically theorised, (iii) as multiply realised functional kinds. Thereby, I claim to theoretically secure and justify the maximum scope, flexibility, and impact for the method of conceptual engineering on our representational devices in our whole cognitive life—in other words, a broad‐spectrum version of conceptual engineering.

show abstract

Disability studies, conceptual engineering, and conceptual activism

Cited by 20 publications

References 35 publications

Rational conceptual conflict and the implementation problem

Rational conceptual conflict and the implementation problem

What Should Conceptual Engineering Be All About?

Broad‐spectrum conceptual engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About