Sexual engineering: conceptual authority and the gadfly strategy

Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper, I argue that recent efforts in the conceptual engineering of sexual orientation are practically misguided. More precisely, I argue that philosophers cannot implement a revision to the concept of sexual orientation because we lack conceptual authority over the concept. Furthermore, in virtue of how philosophy is currently structured, we are unlikely to acquire the relevant kind of conceptual authority. Along the way, I critically discuss an argument from Herman Cappelen for a more global pessimism about the implementation problem. I also discuss some alternative strategies to achieving the political goals that motivate these recent efforts to engineer the concept of sexual orientation. Ultimately, I argue that philosophers should instigate a sort of conceptual abandonment by exploiting their social role as a conceptual gadfly.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2025-10-29

Downloads
365 (#128,233)

6 months
181 (#68,584)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter Finocchiaro
Wuhan University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Fixing Language: An Essay on Conceptual Engineering.Herman Cappelen - 2018 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Conceptual Engineering: The Master Argument.Herman Cappelen - 2019 - In Alexis Burgess, Herman Cappelen & David Plunkett, Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics. New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
The Morality of Freedom.Joseph Raz - 1986 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.

View all 49 references / Add more references