Status Updates From Speech and Morality: On the...

"...indeed, moral facts account (at least in part) for the count-generation of speech" At least in part...so the aim of a necessary foundation is abandoned completely, leaving moral right as simply an outer, already taken-for-granted fact that attaches to a speech act situation sometimes, instead of attempting to create an actual connection between the elusive idea of "right" and speech acts. I was sympathetic but..

I don't know, the objective was to explain how moral right enables speech acts against the view that speech act situations generates morality, but the author's examples in support of his case are all of the type: By making an illocutionary speech act *blah*, the agent introduces some non-conditional moral rights into the equation.

Pragmatic theories amount to a honest confession that you are trying to swindle whoever listens to you, so they refute themselves.

A point one can glean from this: behind use and convention, there is responsibility and normative commitment, in fact as the very features that allow them to exist in the first place. Why do so many try to hide this? Maybe it is simply more easy mentally to assume a sort of automatism yet deny a consistently nihilistic conclusion that would otherwise follow (that is, you might as well just not say anything)

Basically existentialism vs. Kantianism, pitted against each other through the lens of speech act theory. Very interesting stuff!