A particularly interesting branch of the articulated debate on disagreement is concerned with value disagreement, that is, disagreement in the evaluative discourse, involving moral concepts and terms, predicate of personal tastes, aesthetic concepts and terms etc. Disputes about values gave rise to a rich set of questions: Can disagreement ever be faultless? Is disagreement about values genuine? Do speakers mean different things when they apply evaluative predicates in different ways? Can we model value disagreement? How to deal with value-based peer disagreement? What is the relation between ethical and metaethical conceptions of value and value-based disagreement?
The purpose of this conference is to bring to together scholars in philosophy of language, linguistics, ethics and metaethics who have investigated evaluative discourse and evaluative concepts from different approaches and perspectives in order to tackle and tentatively answer some of these questions about value disagreement.
Gunnar Björnsson (Stockholm University)
Max Kölbel (University of Vienna)
Isidora Stojanovic (CNRS, Institut Jean Nicod, Paris)
To register: Please send a mail to email@example.com with "Registration" in the subject line.
ArgLab Research Colloquium | "Illocution and accommodation in the functioning…
ArgLab Research Colloquium | "Narratives in Scientific Justificatory Practice"
ArgLab Research Colloquium | "Communicative agency - an enterprise in…
International colloquium | The philosophy of Donald Davidson
ArgLab Research Colloquium | "Using argumentation as a tool for…
ArgLab Research Colloquium | "Learning Consistency Via Argumentation"
Dina Mendonça on the Role of Reflexivity and Meta-Emotions in…
International Conference | Argumentation and Reasoned Action