Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T11:08:33.656Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ethics and Language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2010

Extract

In a broadcast talk delivered in 1956, the late J. L. Austin began by outlining to his listeners his now well-known concept of ‘the performative utterance and its infelicities’; and at the end of that first section of his talk he made this comment: ‘That equips us, we may suppose, with two shining new tools to crack the crib of reality maybe. It also equips us – it always does – with two shining new skids under our metaphysical feet’. In this talk I intend to illustrate a particular respect in which, in moral philosophy, the partial pessimism of Austin's comment has proved abundantly justified. I shall try to show how in this field one shining new tool has led in fact to the skidding of moral philosophers' feet – how one bright idea (an idea, as it happens, very closely akin to that which Austin himself was discussing) has led some influential theorists off in the wrong direction, and the rest of us back in the end, with rather little gained, to a position not far from that of our predecessors of about a hundred years ago. This dismal story, I should in justice make clear at the outset, is not that of the whole of moral philosophy, not even of moral philosophy in English; I shall be tracing only one out of several concurrent lines of thought, but the line which I shall trace will be, I think, readily recognised as having been, and perhaps as still being, more conspicuous than most.

Type
Papers
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 1968

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 196 note 1 , Austin, ‘Performative Utterances’, in his Philosophical Papers (1961), p. 228.Google Scholar

page 197 note 1 I have in mind here particularly the more extreme views of H. A. Prichard. Not all intuitionists went quite so far as he did, but it would be beside the present point to bring in the several variant forms of intuitionism.

page 203 note 1 Let me say again here that I am fully, even painfully, aware that by some the last few paragraphs will be regarded as grossly unfair, or even as a foolish travesty. I do not (of course) share this view; but I think I understand it, and I believe that I could, given time, undermine its foundations.

page 204 note 1 Particularly, of course, in his How to Do Things with Words (1962)Google Scholar.

page 205 note 1 George C. Kerner (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1966).