Criticizing Language
Dangers, Deficiencies and Conceptual Engineering
Abstract
In this paper, I consider a number of philosophical critiques of language and describe how their criticisms compare. In particular, I discuss how the current trend in the philosophy of language known as conceptual engineering fits into this tradition and to what extent it can be considered a critique of language per se, rather than a method of addressing dissatisfactions with certain individual terms. I suggest that criticisms can be divided allegations of two types of shortcoming: dangers and deficiencies. In the category of dangers, I consider some well-known examples from the history of philosophy, and suggest that they partly rely on an unexpressed from of Linguistic Determinism. I then move on to the deficiencies highlighted in the critiques offered by Wittgenstein in the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, and Mauthner in his Contributions to a Critique of Language. These form a pair of apparently opposite ways of considering the flaws in language, but I shall argue that they have much in common. I then describe the conceptual engineering movement and its mission to provide ‘improved’ meanings of certain terms. I show that implicit in the assumptions behind conceptual engineering are criticisms of language of both varieties – current meanings are seen as dangerous as they represent a threat to social justice, and the system of allocation of meaning is seen as flawed and in need of external intervention.
References
Berkeley, George. 1988. Principles of Human Knowledge. London: Penguin.
Bredeck, Elizabeth. 1990. “Crumbling Foundations: Fritz Mauthner and Philosophy after ‘Philosophy’.” Modern Austrian Literature 23 (2): 41–53.
Burgess-Jackson, Keith. 1995. “Rape and persuasive definition.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 25 (3): 415–54
Cappelen, Herman. 2018. Fixing Language: An Essay on Conceptual Engineering. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cappelen, Herman. 2020. “Conceptual Engineering: The Master Argument.” In Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics, edited by H. Burgess, H. Cappelen, and D. Plunkett. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carrera de la Red, María José. 2008. “’Thought Words, Words Inane, Thought Inane’: Samuel Beckett’s Critique of Language in His Four Novellas.” In Proceedings of the 31st AEDEAN Conference, edited by Lorenzo Modia, 723–31. A Coruña: Universidade.
Dapia, Silvia G. 2006. “The Metaphor of Translation: Borges and Mauthner’s Critique of Language.” Variaciones Borges 21: 23–85.
Deutsch, Max. 2020. “Speaker’s Reference, Stipulation, and a Dilemma for Conceptual Engineers.” Philosophical Studies 177: 3935–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-020-01416-z.
Haslanger, Sally. 2000. “Gender and Race: (What) Are They? (What) Do We Want Them to Be?” Nous 34: 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/0029-4624.00201.
Henne, Céline. 2024. “A Pragmatist Response to Deutsch’s Dilemma for Conceptual Engineers.” In Conceptual Engineering: Methodological and Metaphilosophical Issues, edited by Piotr Stalmaszczyk, Chapter 4. Leiden: Brill.
Hinton, Martin. 2021. Evaluating the Language of Argument. Cham: Springer.
Hinton, Martin. 2024. “Conceptual Engineering and the Philosophical Fallacies of Language.” Topoi. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-024-10067-2
Hinton, Martin, and Fabrizio Macagno, eds. 2024. Arguing with Engineered Concepts. Special issue, Topoi.
Isaac, Manuel Gustavo. 2023. “Which Concept of Concept for Conceptual Engineering?” Erkenntnis 88: 2145–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-021-00447-0.
Jorem, Sigurd, and Guido Löhr. 2024. “Inferentialist Conceptual Engineering.” Inquiry 67 (3): 932–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2022.2062045.
Kager, Maria. 2018. “James Joyce and Fritz Mauthner: Multilingual Liberators of Language.”The Germanic Review: Literature, Culture, Theory 93 (1): 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/00168890.2018.1396082.
Kienpointner, Manuel. 1996. “Whorf and Wittgenstein: Language, World View and Argumentation.” Argumentation 10: 475–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142980.
Koch, Steffen. 2021. “There Is No Dilemma for Conceptual Engineering: Reply to Max Deutsch.” Philosophical Studies 178: 2279–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-020-01546-4.
Löhr, Guido. 2024. “What’s the Relation between Conceptual Ethics and Ethics? An Instrumentalist Defense of Conceptual Engineering.” In Conceptual Engineering: Methodological and Metaphilosophical Issues, edited by Piotr Stalmaszczyk, Chapter 8. Leiden: Brill.
Matsui, Takaaki. 2024. “Local Conceptual Engineering in a Linguistic Sub-Group and the Implementation Problem.” In Conceptual Engineering: Methodological and Metaphilosophical Issues, edited by Piotr Stalmaszczyk, Chapter 6. Leiden: Brill.
Mauthner, Fritz. 1901–1902. Beiträge zu einer Kritik der Sprache. Stuttgart: Cotta.
Naess, Arne. 1966. Communication and Argument. London: Allen and Unwin.
Nájera, Elena. 2014. “Wittgenstein versus Mauthner: Two Critiques of Language, Two Mysticism.” In From the ALWS Archives: A Selection of Papers from the International Wittgenstein Symposia in Kirchberg am Wechsel. Accessed November 3, 2024. https://wab.uib.no/ojs/index.php/agora-alws/article/viewFile/2659/3041.
Nelson, Leonard. 2016. A Theory of Philosophical Fallacies. Translated by F. Leal and D. Carus. Cham: Springer.
Oliver, William D. 1963. “Peirce on ‘The Ethics of Terminology’.” The Philosophical Quarterly 13 (52): 238–45. https://doi.org/10.2307/2955490.
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1958. The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Edited by Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss (Volumes 1–6), and Arthur Burks (Volumes 7–8). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pruś, Jakub, and Andrew Aberdein. 2022. “Is Every Definition Persuasive? Douglas Walton on Persuasiveness of Definition.” Informal Logic 42 (1): 25–47. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v42i1.7211.
Schiappa, Edward. 2003. Defining Reality: Definitions and the Politics of Meaning. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Schlick, Moritz. 1936. “Meaning and Verification.” The Philosophical Review 45: 339–69.
Schumann, Jennifer, Sandrine Zufferey, and Steve Oswald. 2021. “The Linguistic Formulation of Fallacies Matters: The Case of Causal Connectives.” Argumentation 35 (3): 361–88.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-020-09540-0.
Seron, Denis. 2021. “Brentano and Mauthner on Grammatical Illusions.” In Philosophy of Language in the Brentano School, edited by A. Dewalque, C. Gauvry, and S. Richard. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Shields, Matthew. 2021. “Conceptual Domination.” Synthese 199: 15043–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03454-4.
Shields, Matthew. 2023. “Conceptual Engineering, Conceptual Domination, and the Case of Conspiracy Theories.” Social Epistemology 37 (4): 464–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2023.2172696.
Skerl, Jennie. 1974. “Fritz Mauthner’s ‘Critique of Language’ in Samuel Beckett’s Watt.” Contemporary Literature 15 (4): 474–87. https://doi.org/10.2307/1207773.
Stalmaszczyk, Piotr, ed. 2024. Conceptual Engineering: Methodological and Metaphilosophical Issues. Leiden: Brill.
Stevenson, Charles L. 1944. Ethics and language. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Tindale, Christopher W. 2007. Fallacies and Argument Appraisal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Visser, Jacky, Marcin Koszowy, Barbara Konat, Katarzyna Budzyńska, and Chris Reed. 2018. “Straw Man as Misuse of Rephrase.” In Argumentation and Inference: Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation, Fribourg 2017, vol. 2, edited by Steve Oswald and Didier Maillat, 555–74. London: College Publications.
Walton, Douglas. 2001. “Persuasive Definitions and Public Policy Arguments.” Argumentation and Advocacy 37 (3): 117–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2001.11951664.
Weiler, Gershon. 1958. “On Fritz Mauthner’s Critique of Language.” Mind 67 (265): 80–87. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LXVII.265.80.
Weiler, Gershon. 1970. Mauthner’s Critique of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Whorf, Benjamin Lee. 1956. Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Edited by John B. Carroll. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1974. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Translated by D. F. Pears and B.F. McGuinness. London: Routledge.
Wolff, Philip, and Kevin J. Holmes. 2011. “Linguistic Relativity.” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 2 (3): 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.104.
Copyright (c) 2024 Ignatianum University in Cracow
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
- When submitting a text, the author declares that he/she is the Author of the article (hereinafter referred to as the “Work”) and:
- he/she owns the exclusive and unlimited copyright to the Work,
- is entitled to dispose of the copyright to the Work.
Declares that it does not infringe any third party copyrights or legal rights.
Declares that there is no conflict of interest.
2. At the same time, the Author grants the Ignatianum University in Cracowa royalty-free, non-exclusive and territorially unlimited licence to use the Work in the following fields of exploitation:
- recording the Work in a hard copy, as well as on a digital or magnetic medium;
- reproduction of the Work using any technique, without limitation of the number of editions or copies;
- distribution of the Work and its copies on any medium, including marketing, sale, lending, and rental;
- introduction of the Work into a computer memory;
- disseminating the Work in information networks, including in the Internet;
- public performance, exhibition, display, reproduction, broadcasting and re-broadcasting, as well as making the Work available to the public in such a way that everyone can have access to it at a time and place of their own choosing;
- within the scope of dependent rights to the Work, including in particular the right to make necessary changes to the Work resulting from editorial and methodical development, as well as to translate the Work into foreign languages;
The licence is granted from the moment of the transfer of the Work to the Ignatianum University in Cracow. The Ignatianum University in Cracow is entitled to grant further sub-licences to the Work within the scope of the right granted. The licence is time-limited and it is granted for a period of 15 years, starting from the date of its granting.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to publish their text online (e.g. in their institution’s repository or on the institution’s website) before or during the submission process as this may lead to beneficial exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published text (See The Effect of Open Access). We recommend using any of the following portals of research associations:
- ResearchGate
- SSRN
- Academia.edu
- Selected Works
- Academic Search
