The structure of semantic norms

Abstract

AbstractThe normativity of meaning—introduced by Kripke in 1982, and the subject of active debate since the early 1990s—has been exclusively understood in terms of duty‐imposing norms. But there are norms of another type, well‐known within the philosophy of law: authority‐conferring norms. Philosophers thinking and writing about the normativity of meaning—normativists, anti‐normativists, and even Kripke himself—seem to have failed to consider the possibility that semantic norms are authority‐conferring. I argue that semantic norms should be understood as having an authority‐conferring structure, and show how this allows normativism about meaning to escape the two most popular arguments against it.