Stephen Finley's Research On Normative Meaning Theory

“What does normative language express?” is the core question of any normative theory.However,due to the complex semantics and changeable usage of normative judgments,it is difficult to analyze the meaning of normative language.So far many controversial normative theories have been derived.Stephen Finlay tries to use the concept of “end” to provide a unified meaning analysis for normative language,and resolve the controversies in normative field.His central idea is to treat normative judgments as quantification of possibilities.To say that something is normative means that it contributes to the realization of the end implied in the context.This paper expounds and discusses Finlay's semantic and pragmatic analysis of normative language,as well as his analysis of the meaning of“normativity” itself.Drawing on traditional modal semantics,Finlay argues that the modal meaning of “ought” is “more likely”,which is between “may” and “must”.“More likely”means that the means to which the statement refers is more probable in helping achieve the underlying end than the other means in the context.In his opinion,such a definition only uses non-normative items to explain the items with normative meanings,providing a naturalistic reductionist analysis.He calls this the “endrelational” semantic theory.Further,when the “end-relational” semantic theory is applied to the normative use of language,Finlay can analyze the normative features of language with the help of the “end” and the corresponding means in the context: a normative judgment can motivate the agent to act because it provides the means to help realize the agent's end;we intuitively believe that a normative judgment is true because we can make sure that the means is valid through comprehensive consideration of available information,utility principle,preference principle,reliability principle and other factors;a normative judgment shows objective and absolute power because the speaker,with the intention of forcing the listener to act,deliberately presents his subjective orders as if they should be obeyed unconditionally.After finishing the meaning analysis of normative language,Finlay turns to the study of what normativity is.He believes that the fundamental reason why many meta-normative theories fall into disagreement is that they misunderstand normative language: they observe the meaning of one part of the whole and use it against other meanings,but fail to realize that the meanings are interrelated and constitute the whole.Thus they fall into disagreement on the assertion of the whole.Finlay also uses“end” to connect seemingly conflicting normative meanings.For example,the difference between objective normative facts and subjective normative motivation is explained as two elements that are conducive to the realization of the agent's end: in order to achieve the end,the agent needs to accept normative guidance from external facts,and also needs to regard a certain element as the reason for her behavior.Finlay's accurate analysis of normative language usage and his ambition to establish a unified normative theory are his most laudable academic assets.However,there are still some problems should be discussed in his theory: whether it is necessary to unify semantic expression is questionable;obscure normative meanings and metaphysical elements need to be excluded from his semantic analysis;the core concepts of “end”,“desire”,“normative” and “normative meanings” need to be more clearly defined.