The Incentivized Action View of Institutional Facts as an Alternative to the Searlean View: a Response to Butchard and D'Amico

In our earlier work, we argued, contra Searle, that institutional facts can be understood in terms of non-institutional facts about actions and incentives. Butchard and D’Amico claim that we have misinterpreted Searle, that our main argument against him (“the circularity objection”) has no merit and that our positive view cannot account for institutional facts created via joint action. We deny all three charges.

Jaar van publicatie:2016

Toegankelijkheid:Closed