Is there a fact of the matter between direct reference theory and (neo-)Fregeanism?

Philosophical Studies 154 (1):53-78 (2011)
It is argued here that there is no fact of the matter between direct reference theory and neo-Fregeanism. To get a more precise idea of the central thesis of this paper, consider the following two claims: (i) While direct reference theory and neo-Fregeanism can be developed in numerous ways, they can be developed in essentially parallel ways; that is, for any (plausible) way of developing direct reference theory, there is an essentially parallel way of developing neo-Fregeanism, and vice versa. And (ii) for each such pair of theories, there is no fact of the matter as to which of them is superior; or more precisely, they are tied in terms of factual accuracy. These are sweeping claims that cannot be fully justified in a single paper. But arguments are given here that motivate these theses, i.e., that suggest that they are very likely true
Keywords Direct reference theory  Neo-Fregeanism  Factual emptiness  Facts of the matter  Belief reports  Propositions
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11098-011-9702-9
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 23,664
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Saul Kripke (2010). Naming and Necessity. In Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel (eds.), Philosophy. Routledge 431-433.

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Katherine Hawley (2007). Neo‐Fregeanism and Quantifier Variance. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 81 (1):233 - 249.
Kirk A. Ludwig (1993). Direct Reference in Thought and Speech. Communication and Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly Journal 26 (1):49-76.
Mark Crimmins (1993). So-Labeled Neo-Fregeanism. Philosophical Studies 69 (2-3):265 - 279.
Rod Bertolet (1994). Conventions and Coreferentiality. Journal of Philosophical Research 19:257-262.
Michael A. Bishop (2003). The Pessimistic Induction, the Flight to Reference and the Metaphysical Zoo. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 17 (2):161 – 178.
Alan Weir (2003). Neo-Fregeanism: An Embarrassment of Riches. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 44 (1):13-48.
Bob Hale (2007). Neo-Fregeanism and Quantifier Variance. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 107 (1pt3):375-385.
Nathan Salmon (2008). That F. Philosophical Studies 141 (2):263 - 280.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

167 ( #24,672 of 1,902,892 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

22 ( #24,402 of 1,902,892 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.