A thread on normativity would potentially be pretty interesting. Is it like truth: can't do without it, but can't discover any conceptual scaffolding under it? — Mongrel
It seems to me that convention-following does explain normativity, but that nevertheless we cannot escape it, because language can only be understood if conventions are followed.The idea (as I understand it) is that if convention-following explained normativity, then we should be able to escape normative language......
Do you agree with that? — Mongrel
There is no normativity without authority, or at least the perception of authority. — Metaphysician Undercover
It seems to me that convention-following does explain normativity, but that nevertheless we cannot escape it, because language can only be understood if conventions are followed. — andrewk
I would have thought authority would have derived its legitimacy from morality, not vice versa. — darthbarracuda
Should we agree that 2+2=4 because we're commanded to? — Mongrel
What about Euthyphro, do the gods love what is just because it is just or is it just because the gods love it? — darthbarracuda
If morality derived its legitimacy from authority, then there would be no reason to be moral if there was no authority to enforce morality. But that's wrong. Morality tells us to act in a certain way even if there's nobody there to make sure we do. — darthbarracuda
What do you have in mind with the term 'genuine normativity'? Is it the phenomenon of somebody making normative claims - that X is true, or that people should do Y - and believes those claims to be true in some absolute, objective, mind-independent sense?I don't think it's explaining genuine normativity — Mongrel
The idea (as I understand it) is that if convention-following explained normativity, then we should be able to escape normative language. We can't escape it, therefore: we must accept genuine normativity (whether we have an explanation for it or not). — Mongrel
In what way is 'convention' different from 'normativity', and therefore potentially an 'explanation' of it, rather than just a redescription? — mcdoodle
f you act per convention because you think you ought to, there is normativity to your convention adherence. If your general outlook is that people should look to convention to discover goodness, righteousness, and error free living, you would be squashing the two concepts together to the point that you'd probably have difficulty pulling them apart.
Those who subscribe to 'natural law' ethics believe that norms aren't simply a matter of convention but are real independently of convention. Social convention then is supposed to mirror or embody the natural law. I believe Thomism is an example. — Wayfarer
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.