Project description
Studying the interpretation of ‘good’ across contexts
Words like ‘good’, ‘ugly’ and ‘tasty’ don’t have fixed interpretations. Their interpretations change depending on context. For instance, calling a bear, a knife or an act of charity ‘good’ varies in interpretation based on the context. This flexibility complicates ideas in philosophy, where concepts like goodness and beauty are expected to be stable. An action might be described as ‘good’ in one context but ‘not good’ in another, creating challenges in ethical debates. With this in mind, the ERC-funded EVIL project combines insights from philosophy and linguistics to develop the first complete analysis of these evaluative adjectives. It will use specific case-studies and empirical data to clarify our understanding of values across different contexts.
Objective
Evaluative adjectives—words like ‘good’, ‘ugly’, ‘tasty’ and ‘elegant’—have interpretations that appear to depend on the context. If you describe a knife, a bear or an act of charity as ‘good’, you do not seem to be saying that it has some fixed property of goodness. Rather, the context in which you are speaking affects the interpretation of ‘good’. Evaluative adjectives are closely linked to concepts of central importance in philosophy, such as moral goodness, beauty, and value. Hence their apparent context-dependence has troubling consequences for many philosophical debates. For example, an act of charity could count as ‘good’ when we are talking about it in one context and as ‘not good’ when we are talking about it in another context, due to different interpretations of ‘good’. This startling conclusion is difficult to reconcile with most ethical theories.
While philosophers and linguists have shown increasing interest in evaluative adjectives, a full analysis has remained out of reach for several reasons. First, philosophical and linguistic investigations often proceed in isolation from each other. Second, the scope of analyses can be overly specific, by virtue of focusing on a single case-study, or overly general, by focusing on features that supposedly unify all evaluative adjectives. Third, the predictions that emerge from different analyses are rarely subjected to empirical assessment.
The project aims to give an account of the meaning of the word ‘good’ and other evaluative adjectives, along with the nature of goodness and other forms of value. It will be the first fully integrated analysis, by incorporating philosophical and linguistic perspectives, generalisations about evaluative adjectives and particular case-studies, along with empirical results. The novelty of the project lies in this integrative and interdisciplinary aspect. The results will resolve central and long-standing issues in both philosophy and linguistics.
Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
- humanities languages and literature linguistics
- humanities philosophy, ethics and religion philosophy
You need to log in or register to use this function
Keywords
Project’s keywords as indicated by the project coordinator. Not to be confused with the EuroSciVoc taxonomy (Fields of science)
Project’s keywords as indicated by the project coordinator. Not to be confused with the EuroSciVoc taxonomy (Fields of science)
Programme(s)
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
-
HORIZON.1.1 - European Research Council (ERC)
MAIN PROGRAMME
See all projects funded under this programme
Topic(s)
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Funding Scheme
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
HORIZON-ERC - HORIZON ERC Grants
See all projects funded under this funding scheme
Call for proposal
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
(opens in new window) ERC-2024-STG
See all projects funded under this callHost institution
Net EU financial contribution. The sum of money that the participant receives, deducted by the EU contribution to its linked third party. It considers the distribution of the EU financial contribution between direct beneficiaries of the project and other types of participants, like third-party participants.
BS8 1QU BRISTOL
United Kingdom
The total costs incurred by this organisation to participate in the project, including direct and indirect costs. This amount is a subset of the overall project budget.