Abstract

Conceptual engineering typically aims to fix some conceptual defects. Mona Simion, however, argues that it is permissible to engineer non-defective concepts too, but this mustn’t come with an epistemic loss. This paper holds that some conceptual resources should be fixed though because of serious ideological defects involved and it isn’t possible to engineer such concepts without an epistemic loss; still, this is the normative ground to engineer. In this spirit, Paul-Mikhail Catapang Podosky argues for an expanded version of Simion’s view to make engineering ideologically defective concepts permissible. Although Podosky’s critique of Simion is compelling, this paper critiques Podosky’s expanded version too: Podosky’s understanding of how ideological concepts work also generates prima facie prohibitions to engineer when engineering looks highly desirable. The paper thus proceeds to offer an alternative diagnosis of ideological defects. It subsequently raises another, less normative, issue about implementation: it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to merely ‘tweak’ ideological concepts. The discussion hence offers grounds to be skeptical about the feasibility of implementing new conceptual resources. It also urges modesty about how emancipatory ‘our’ attempts at conceptual innovation can be without this being enabled by alterations in background social conditions.