Constitutive Rules and Speech-Act Analysis

Ransdell, Joseph

doi:10.2307/2025037

Cited by 27 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…' (2005, p. 21) In Sect. 2.2, we see that Ransdell's (1971) criticism of Searle can be interpreted in this light. My aim in this paper is to come to a distinctive appreciation of how constitutive rules contribute to our understanding of institutional phenomena, and how they are relevant to the normative relations that obtain between us.…”

Section: The Conventional Generation Account Of Constitutive Rulesmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…2.2 First-Order and Second-Order Rules Ransdell (1971) distinguishes between two aspects of institutional terms: connotation and import. Roughly speaking, connotation concerns the descriptive conditions that have to be met in order for an institutional term to apply, while its import pertains to what can and cannot be done once those conditions are met.…”

Section: Constitutive and Regulative Rulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constitutive Rules, Language, and Ontology

Hindriks

2009

Erkenn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: The Conventional Generation Account Of Constitutive Rulesmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Constitutive and Regulative Rulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constitutive Rules, Language, and Ontology

Hindriks

2009

Erkenn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hindriks: connotation and import Following Ransdell [26], Hindriks [27] distinguishes two aspects of constitutive rules: connotation and import. Connotation defines the conditions which have to be satisfied in order to apply a certain institutional term: it is a descriptive component.…”

Section: Modeling Constitutive Rulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting Constitutive Rules

Sileno

Boer

Engers

2018

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper is an investigation on how behaviour relates to norms, i.e. on how a certain conduct acquires meaning in institutional terms. The simplest example of this phenomenon is given by the 'countas' relation, generally associated to constitutive rules, through which an agent has the legal capacity, via performing a certain action, to create, modify or destroy a certain institutional fact. In the literature, however, the 'count-as' relation is mostly accounted for its classificatory functions. Introducing an extension of the Petri Net notation, we argue that the structure of constitutive rules cannot be completely captured by logic conditionals, nor by causal connectives, but it can approached by the notion of supervenience.

show abstract

“…‘assertion’) or rule‐constituted situations with certain consequences (e. g. ‘checkmate’, ‘touchdown’). (Alston : 254, Glüer & Pagin : 220, Pagin : 174, Ransdell ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Constitutive Rules: Games, Language, and Assertion

Reiland

2018

Philos Phenomenol Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many philosophers think that games like chess, languages like English, and speech acts like assertion are constituted by rules. Lots of others disagree. To argue over this productively, it would be first useful to know what it would be for these things to be rule‐constituted. Searle famously claimed in Speech Acts that rules constitute things in the sense that they make possible the performance of actions related to those things (Searle 1969). On this view, rules constitute games, languages, and speech acts in the sense that they make possible playing them, speaking them and performing them. This raises the question what it is to perform rule‐constituted actions (e. g. play, speak, assert) and the question what makes constitutive rules distinctive such that only they make possible the performance of new actions (e. g. playing). In this paper I will criticize Searle's answers to these questions. However, my main aim is to develop a better view, explain how it works in the case of each of games, language, and assertion and illustrate its appeal by showing how it enables rule‐based views of these things to respond to various objections.

show abstract

Constitutive Rules and Speech-Act Analysis

Cited by 27 publications

References 0 publications

Constitutive Rules, Language, and Ontology

Constitutive Rules, Language, and Ontology

Revisiting Constitutive Rules

Constitutive Rules: Games, Language, and Assertion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About