In the study of Wittgenstein's normativity,the legitimacy of the normativity of meaning has remained contentious,centering on the interpretation of his concept of"meaning as use".Two predominant viewpoints pre-vail within the scholarly community:the normative interpretation and the naturalistic interpretation.The former em-phasizes that meaning is intrinsically normative,requiring no external source for normative legitimacy,the latter emphasizes that meaning is not inherently normative and there exists a natural fact to ensure the objectivity of the norm from the outside.Horwich argues that"meaning as use"has multiple different and compatible interpretations,but his work is based on a criticism of Wittgenstein's followers and does not provide a systematic exposition.Draw-ing from Horwich's groundwork,this paper first reconstructs the compatible interpretation to provide a normative explanation that is compatible with both interpretations.Secondly,an analysis of Horwich's framework reveals that it is essentially a natural interpretation,and combines it with Foot's and Cavell's natural interpretations to improve the Horwich's scheme,explaining what natural facts the semantic normativity is based on.Finally,the paper ad-dresses potential issues with the compatible interpretation,comparing the advantages and disadvantages of the natu-ralistic and normative interpretations,and endeavors to provide a reasonable range for understanding normativity.
关键词
维特根斯坦/意义即用法/意义规范性/保罗·霍里奇/语言哲学
Key words
Wittgenstein/meaning as use/normativity of meaning/Paul Horwich/philosophy of language
维普
万方数据