The Nature and Limits of Conceptual Truths

Abstract

The paper examines the relationship between conceptual claims and their empirical foundations or presuppositions. I argue that such relationship is trivial only in cases of trivial conceptual theses. When only a conceptual claim aims to solve any real problem beyond reporting of a uniform and uncontroversial linguistic practice it becomes deeply dependent on many purely empirical and evaluative tacit assumptions. In such cases so called conceptual claims boil down to rather poorly substantiated empirical generalizations. This undermines cognitive value of most of popular argumentation pursued under the name of conceptual analysis in many domains (including legal theory), believed to be able to illuminate substantive problems and controversies. .

Keywords: conceptual analysis, truth, method, law, legal theory, philosophy