
doi: 10.1111/meta.12548
What role does ordinary language play in philosophical theorizing today? One might think: little. After all, analytic philosophy has moved past its “ordinary language” phase; in metaphysics, for example, few would think that attending to “time” and related words has anything to teach us about the nature of, and how we persist through, time. The aim of this paper, however, is to argue that contemporary analytic philosophy pays more attention to ordinary language use than the implicit historiography mentioned above suggests. Moreover, and moving from description to evaluation, the paper argues that this is philosophically defensible. In many areas of philosophy, to learn about a phenomenon weought to pay at least some attention to how ordinary language users speak about it.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 4 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
