Abstract

the primary objective of this paper is to critically assess expressivism within the framework of the vagueness problem proposed by John MacFarlane. (2016; 2020a; 2020b; 2020c). In general, while it seems that expressivism works within certain contexts, allowing us to provide good explanations for particular instances of vague language use, it falls short of offering a comprehensive solution to the vagueness problem. I will argue that the expressivist response to these cases ultimately boils down to stipulating a cut-off point for vague terms. Furthermore, how expressivists expound on the content of sentences containing vague terms imposes certain logical constraints that expressivism has aimed to avoid. These constraints lead us to the conclusion that expressivism does not provide a better solution when compared to alternative vagueness theories like epistemicism and supervaluationism.