Mind and Language 13 (3):341–346 (1998)
|Abstract||Saul Kripke's puzzle about belief demonstrates the lack of soundness of the traditional argument for the Fregean fundamental principle that the sentences 'S believes that a is F' and 'S believes that b is F' can differ in truth value even if a = b. This principle is a crucial premise in the traditional Fregean argument for the existence of semantically relevant senses, individuative elements of beliefs that are sensitive to our varying conceptions of what the beliefs are about. Joseph Owens has offered a new argument for this fundamental principle, one that is not subject to Kripke's criticisms. I argue that even though Owens' argument avoids Kripke's criticisms, it has other flaws.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Thomas Pogge (2008). Cohen to the Rescue! Ratio 21 (4):454-475.
Joseph G. Moore (1999). Misdisquotation and Substitutivity: When Not to Infer Belief From Assent. Mind 108 (430):335-365.
Carlo Penco, Kripke's Puzzle About Belief. teaching material.
Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (1998). A Fregean Principle. History and Philosophy of Logic 19 (3):125-135.
Hans D. Sluga (1977). Frege's Alleged Realism. Inquiry 20 (1-4):227 – 242.
Marco Ruffino (2003). Why Frege Would Not Be a Neo-Fregean. Mind 112 (445):51-78.
Bryan Frances (1998). Defending Millian Theories. Mind 107 (428):703-728.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads33 ( #41,906 of 722,745 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,247 of 722,745 )
How can I increase my downloads?