In order to view the field of communication as a practical discipline, this paper examines the debate between linguistic prescriptivism (the belief that standards of correct language exist and can be warranted), and scientific linguistics (which rejects the idea of standards in the name of scientific objectivity). Following an introduction to the idea of a practical discipline and an overview of the controversy concerning linguistic prescriptivism, the paper argues that although prescriptivist attitudes are generally unsound, the practical usefulness of linguistic standardization has been facilitated by prescriptivism. The paper also acknowledges the prescriptivist premise that linguistic choices are matters of taste subject to reflection and critical judgment. The paper concludes both that linguistic science has failed to acknowledge aspects of language about which deliberation is possible and necessary, and that traditional prescriptivism has advocated choices that are not responsive to the full range of relevant considerations. Using D. G. McKay's linguistic research to evaluate the ramifications of replacing "he" with a singular generic pronoun "they," the paper illustrates that deliberation about linguistic rules is possible and can be informed systematically by linguistic research, yielding a modified prescriptivism that rejects the dogmatism, social intolerance and intellectual slackness of traditional prescriptivism, while retaining the essential idea that questions about how humans ought to speak are worthy of serious consideration. (JG)