Rule-governed Practices in the Natural World

Abstract

I address the question of whether naturalism can provide adequate means for the scientific study of rules and rule-following behavior. As the term "naturalism" is used in many different ways in the contemporary debate, I will first spell out which version of naturalism I am targeting. Then I will recall a classical argument against naturalism in a version presented by Husserl. In the main part of the paper, I will sketch a conception of rule-following behavior that is influenced by Sellars and Haugeland. I will argue that rule-following is an essential part of human nature and insist in the social dimension of rules. Moreover, I will focus on the often overlooked fact that genuine rule-following behavior requires resilience and presupposes an inclination to calibrate one's own behavior to that of the other members of the community. Rule-following, I will argue, is possible only for social creatures who follow shared rules, which in turn presupposes a shared (firstperson plural) perspective. This implies, however, that our scientific understanding of human nature has to remain incomplete as long as it does not take this perspective, which prima facie seems alien to it, into account.

Two Pillars of Institutions: Constitutive Rules and Participation

“…19 Calibration can also take place at a more complex level that entails discussions about the linguistic norms that guide our practice. In a series of papers, Matthias Kiesselbach (2012;2020) has drawn attention to the fact that language contains a practice of calibration or a "calibration game", as he calls it, that allows participants to render their own commitments (or that of others) explicit. A calibration game of this kind is part of a more comprehensive shared practice, typically that of an articulate language that allows for discussions over the use of certain terms.…”

“…She has, in other words, to be familiar with the practice of playing competitive games in order to know what to do with the rulebook. I discuss this point in more detail inHuemer (2020).…”