Normativity, semantic reasons and instrumental reasons

Alexander Miller has claimed that Kripke might not deploy the thesis of the normativity of meaning at the service of the critique of dispositional semantic realism, by a route analogous to the Humean rejection of moral realism, because semantic reasons could be at most hypothetical reasons. I will begin displaying a Humean argument against moral realism. Then I will explain why Miller thinks that Kripke could not an analogous argument against reductive semantic realism. From Miller remarks, I will distil an argument to the conclusion that a kind of conditionals, which I call RAS-DA conditionals, could sustain only non-categorical obligations -or in a more clear terminology, instrumental obligations. Finally, I will argue that the attempt to fit RAS-DA conditionals in an instrumental template denaturalizes the ontology and the phenomenology of semantic intention.