Conceptual engineering, language use, and the neutral implementation challenge

Abstract Conceptual engineering projects have been targeted by what is known as the “implementation challenge,” which calls for an account of how it is possible to change meanings, given that we have no control over the complex ways in which meaning supervenes (for example) on patterns of use. In the first part of this paper, this supervenience‐based formulation of the challenge is questioned, and a new formulation is proposed, which strives to be as metasemantically neutral as possible. The new challenge is called “the uptake challenge,” and its theoretical advantages are defended over those of the supervenience‐based version. In the second part of the paper, a response to the uptake challenge is outlined. This involves reflecting on the notion of control, especially on aspects that pertain to its gradability and relativity to an agent's goals. The aim is to put into proper perspective, and ultimately question, the threat posed by (this version of) the implementation challenge.