What topic continuity problem?

References

• Balcerak Jackson, Brendan. 2019. “Essentially Practical Questions.” Analytic Philosophy 60: 1–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ball, Derek. 2020. “Revisionary Analysis Without Meaning Change (Or, Could Women Be Analytically Oppressed?).” In Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics, edited by Alexis Burgess, Herman Cappelen, and David Plunkett, 35–58. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barker, Chris. 2002. “The Dynamics of Vagueness.” Linguistics and Philosophy 25: 1–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belleri, Delia. 2017. “Verbalism and Metalinguistic Negotiation in Ontological Disputes.” Philosophical Studies 174: 2211–2226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belleri, Delia. 2021. “Downplaying the Change of Subject Objection to Conceptual Engineering.” Inquiry: 1–24. doi:10.1080/0020174X.2021.1908161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brigandt, Ingo. 2010. “The Epistemic Goal of a Concept: Accounting for the Rationality of Semantic Change and Variation.” Synthese 177: 19–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess, Alexis, Herman Cappelen, and David Plunkett. 2020. Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cappelen, Herman. 2018. Fixing Language: An Essay on Conceptual Engineering. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carnap, Rudolf. 1947. Meaning and Necessity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carnap, Rudolf. 1950. Logical Foundations of Probability. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chalmers, David J. 2011. “Verbal Disputes.” The Philosophical Review 120: 515–566.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ciardelli, Ivano, Jeroen Groenendijk, and Floris Roelofsen. 2018. Inquisitive Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, Charles, and Floris Roelofsen. 2018. “Questions.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta. Palo Alto, CA: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/questions/.
   Google Scholar
• Deutsch, Max. 2020. “Speaker's Reference, Stipulation, and a Dilemma for Conceptual Engineers.” Philosophical Studies 177: 3935–3957.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fine, Kit. 2016. “Angellic Content.” Journal of Philosophical Logic 45: 199–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flocke, Vera. 2021. “How to Engineer a Concept.” Philosophical Studies 178: 3069–3083.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gettier, Edmund. 1963. “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?” Analysis 6: 121–123.
   Google Scholar
• Grice, Paul H. 1968. “Utterer's Meaning, Sentence-meaning, and Word-meaning.” Foundations of Language 4: 225–242.
   Google Scholar
• Groenendijk, Jeroen. 1999. “The Logic of Interrogation.” In Proceedings of SALT 9, edited by Tanya Matthews and Devon Strolovitch, 109–126. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Groenendijk, Jeroen. 2009. “Inquisitive Semantics: Two Possibilities for Disjunction.” In Seventh International Tbilisi Symposium on Language, Logic, and Computation, edited by P. Bosch, D. Gabelaia, and J. Lang, 80–94. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Groenendijk, Jeroen, and Martin Stokhof. 1984. “Studies on the Semantics of Questions and the Pragmatics of Answers.” PhD diss., University of Amsterdam, Department of Philosophy.
   Google Scholar
• Hamblin, Charles Leonard. 1958. “Questions.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 36: 159–168.
   Google Scholar
• Hamblin, Charles Leonard. 1973. “Questions in Montague English.” Foundations of Language 10: 41–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haslanger, Sally. 2000. “Gender and Race: (What) Are They? (What) Do We Want Them to Be?” Noûs 34: 31–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haslanger, Sally. 2020. “Going on, Not in the Same Way.” In Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics, edited by Alexis Burgess, Herman Cappelen, and David Plunkett, 230–260. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hawke, Peter. 2018. “Theories of Aboutness.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 96: 697–723.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan, David. 1995. “A Problem in Possible-World Semantics.” In Modality, Morality and Belief: Essays in Honor of Ruth Barcan Marcus, edited by W. Sinnott-Armstrong, D. Raffman, and N. Asher, 41–52. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Karttunen, Lauri. 1977. “Syntax and Semantics of Questions.” Linguistics and Philosophy 1: 3–44.
   Google Scholar
• Knoll, Viktoria. 2020. “Verbal Disputes and Topic Continuity.” Inquiry: 1–22. doi:10.1080/0020174X.2020.1850340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoll, Viktoria. 2021. “Topics, Disputes and ‘going Meta’.” Inquiry: 1–29. doi:10.1080/0020174X.2021.1954993.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koch, Steffan. 2021a. “There is No Dilemma for Conceptual Engineering. Reply to Max Deutsch.” Philosophical Studies 178: 2279–2291. doi:10.1007/s11098-020-01546-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koch, Steffan. 2021b. “Why Conceptual Engineers Should Not Worry about Topics.” Erkenntnis: 1–21. doi:10.1007/s10670-021-00446-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kocurek, Alexander W., Ethan J. Jerzak, and Rachel E. Rudolph. 2020. “Against Conventional Wisdom.” Philosophers' Imprint 20: 1–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levin, Janet. 2018. “Functionalism.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta. Palo Alto, CA: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/functionalism/.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, David K. 1988a. “Relevant Implication.” Theoria 54: 161–174.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, David K. 1988b. “Statements Partly about Observation.” Philosophical Papers 17: 1–31.
   Google Scholar
• Mankowitz, Poppy. 2021. “How to Have a Metalinguistic Dispute.” Synthese 199: 5603–5622. doi:10.1007/s11229-021-03038-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Margolis, Eric, and Stephen Laurence. 2019. “Concepts.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta. Palo Alto, CA: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/concepts/.
   Google Scholar
• McPherson, Tristram, and David Plunkett. 2021. “Topic Continuity in Conceptual Engineering and Beyond.” Inquiry: 1–27. doi:10.1080/0020174X.2021.1980095.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mena, Ricardo. 2022. “Metalinguistic Effects.” Mind & Language: 1–21. doi:10.1111/mila.12390.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moran, Richard. 2001. Authority and Estrangement. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nado, Jennifer. 2021. “Conceptual Engineering, Truth, and Efficacy.” Synthese 198 (7): S1507–S1527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parry, William Tuthill. 1968. “The Logic of C. I. Lewis.” In The Philosophy of C. I. Lewis, edited by Paul Arthur Schlipp, 115–154. LaSalle, IL: Open Court.
   Google Scholar
• Perry, John. 1989. “Possible Worlds and Subject Matter.” In The Problem of the Essential Indexical and Other Essays, 145–160. Palo Alto: CSLI Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Pinder, Mark. 2021. “Conceptual Engineering, Metasemantic Externalism and Speaker-Meaning.” Mind; A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 130: 141–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plunkett, David. 2015. “Which Concepts Should We Use?: Metalinguistic Negotiations and the Methodology of Philosophy.” Inquiry 58: 828–874.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plunkett, David, and Tim Sundell. 2013. “Disagreement and the Semantics of Normative and Evaluative Terms.” Philosophers' Imprint 13: 1–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prinzing, Michael. 2018. “The Revisionist's Rubric: Conceptual Engineering and the Discontinuity Problem.” Inquiry 61: 854–880.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Railton, Peter. 1993. “Noncognitivism about Rationality: Benefits, Costs, and an Alternative.” Philosophical Issues 4: 36–51.
   Google Scholar
• Richard, Mark. 2019. Meanings As Species. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Risberg, Olle. 2022. “Ethics and the Question of What to Do.” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy: 1–51. forthcoming.
   Google Scholar
• Ritchie, Katherine. 2020. “Social Structures and the Ontology of Social Groups.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 100: 402–424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, Craige. 2012. “Information Structure in Discourse: Towards an Integrated Formal Theory of Pragmatics.” Semantics and Pragmatics 5: 1–69.
   Google Scholar
• Rudolph, Rachel E. 2021. “Conceptual Exploration.” Inquiry: 1–26. doi:10.1080/0020174X.2021.2002053.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawyer, Sarah. 2018. “The Importance of Concepts.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 118: 127–147.
   Google Scholar
• Sawyer, Sarah. 2020a. “Talk and Thought.” In Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics, edited by Alexis Burgess, Herman Cappelen, and David Plunkett, 379–395. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sawyer, Sarah. 2020b. “Truth and Objectivity in Conceptual Engineering.” Inquiry 63: 1001–1022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shields, Matthew. 2020. “Conceptual Change in Perspective.” Inquiry 63: 930–958.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simion, Mona, and Christopher Kelp. 2020. “Conceptual Innovation, Function First.” Noûs 54: 985–1002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soria-Ruiz, Andrés. 2021. “Evaluative and Metalinguistic Dispute.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy: 1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strawson, P. F. 1963. “Carnap's Views on Conceptual Systems versus Natural Languages in Analytic Philosophy.” In The Philosophy of Rudolph Carnap, edited by Paul Arthur Schilpp, 503–518. London: Open Court.
   Google Scholar
• Thomasson, Amie L. 2017. “Metaphysical Disputes and Metalinguistic Negotiation.” Analytic Philosophy58: 1–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomasson, Amie L. 2020. “A Pragmatic Method for Normative Conceptual Work.” In Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics, edited by Alexis Burgess, Herman Cappelen, and David Plunkett, 435–458. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thomasson, Amie L. 2021. “Conceptual Engineering: When Do We Need It? How Can We Do It?” Inquiry. doi:10.1080/0020174X.2021.2000118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vermeulen, Inga. 2018. “Verbal Disputes and the Varieties of Verbalness.” Erkenntnis 83: 331–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williamson, Timothy. 2000. Knowledge and Its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yablo, Stephen. 2014. Aboutness. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yalcin, Seth. 2018. “Belief as Question-Sensitive.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 97: 23–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar