Premium
Correctness and Cognitivism. Remarks on Robert Alexy's Argument from the Claim to Correctness *
Author(s) -
PAVLAKOS GEORGE
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
ratio juris
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.344
H-Index - 10
eISSN - 1467-9337
pISSN - 0952-1917
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9337.2011.00500.x
Subject(s) - cognitivism (psychology) , argument (complex analysis) , normative , correctness , epistemology , philosophy , utterance , sentence , context (archaeology) , proposition , computer science , cognition , linguistics , psychology , algorithm , paleontology , biochemistry , chemistry , neuroscience , biology
The argument from the claim to correctness has been put forward by Robert Alexy to defend the view that normative utterances admit of objective answers. My purpose in this paper is to preserve this initial aspiration even at the cost of diverting from some of the original ideas in support of the argument. I begin by spelling out a full‐blooded version of normative cognitivism, against which I propose to reconstruct the argument from the claim to correctness. I argue that the context of uttering normative propositions points to the possibility of normative cognition, but does not constitute it. What constitutes the possibility of cognition is, as of necessity, the propositional structure of norms. I conclude that the argument from the claim to correctness ought to safeguard a distinction between the context of uttering a normative sentence and the proposition that individuates the content of the utterance.