Graduate studies at Western
Linguistics and Philosophy 2 (2):225 - 233 (1978)
|Abstract||I argue that (a) the causal theory of proper names and (b) Kripke's chain of references thesis are logically independent of each other, and that the case for (a) is very weak. I observe that rejecting (a) we lose one powerful reason for treating proper names as rigid designators. I then consider reasons for subscribing to (b), and I argue that (b) is compatible with either a rigid or a non-rigid (descriptive) semantic treatment of proper names.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Claudio F. Costa (2011). A Meta-Descriptivist Theory of Proper Names. Ratio 24 (3):259-281.
Pierre Baumann (2010). Are Proper Names Rigid Designators? Axiomathes 20 (2-3):333-346.
Ora Matushansky (2008). On the Linguistic Complexity of Proper Names. Linguistics and Philosophy 31 (5):573-627.
Emar Maier (2007). Proper Names as Rigid Presuppositions. In Estella Puig-Waldmüller (ed.), Proceedings of Sinn Und Bedeutung 11.
Eric Thomas Weber (2008). Proper Names and Persons: Peirce's Semiotic Consideration of Proper Names. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 44 (2):pp. 346-362.
Ralph Clark (2011). Perspectival Direct Reference for Proper Names. Philosophia 39 (2):251-265.
Hugh S. Chandler (1975). Rigid Designation. Journal of Philosophy 72 (13):363-369.
David Boersema (2007). Geach on Proper Names. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 6:37-42.
Mark Textor (1998). Rigidity and De Jure Rigidity. Teorema 17 (1).
Robin Jeshion (2009). The Significance of Names. Mind and Language 24 (4):370-403.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads41 ( #32,763 of 740,918 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,802 of 740,918 )
How can I increase my downloads?