Conventionalism and contingency in promissory powers
dc.contributor.author | Lichter, Andrew | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-03-22T16:18:22Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-03-22T16:18:22Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2023-04-13 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Lichter, A. Conventionalism and contingency in promissory powers. Philos Stud 180, 1769–1792 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-023-01948-0 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0031-8116 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s11098-023-01948-0 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10150/671676 | |
dc.description.abstract | Conventionalism about promising is the view that the power to make binding promises depends essentially on the existence of a social practice or convention of promising. This paper explores an objection to conventionalism that says that—(allegedly) contra conventionalism—there is no morally acceptable world in which we lack the power of promise. Instead, normative powers theorists claim that our power of promise is morally basic or necessary. I argue that the conventionalist need not deny this claim. There are several ways to develop a noncontingent conventionalism: a version of the view that can accommodate the insight that the power of promise is indispensable to morally acceptable lives. Then, I argue that the conventionalist is indeed on the hook for accommodating this insight. I wrap up by considering the state of play in the debate over conventionalism about promising. Once we note the theoretical possibility of noncontingent conventionalism, it looks like the theatre of battle shifts to the difficult question of whether “natural” morality always provides “moral necessities.”. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC | en_US |
dc.rights | © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2023. | en_US |
dc.rights.uri | https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ | en_US |
dc.subject | Philosophy | en_US |
dc.subject | Conventionalism | en_US |
dc.subject | Normative powers | en_US |
dc.subject | Promises | en_US |
dc.title | Conventionalism and contingency in promissory powers | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1573-0883 | |
dc.contributor.department | Philosophy Department, University of Arizona | en_US |
dc.identifier.journal | Philosophical Studies | en_US |
dc.description.note | 12 month embargo; first published 13 April 2023 | en_US |
dc.description.collectioninformation | This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu. | en_US |
dc.eprint.version | Final accepted manuscript | en_US |
dc.identifier.pii | 1948 | |
dc.source.journaltitle | Philosophical Studies | |
dc.source.volume | 180 | |
dc.source.issue | 5-6 | |
dc.source.beginpage | 1769 | |
dc.source.endpage | 1792 |