Rigid designation and anaphoric theories of reference

Philosophical Studies 130 (2):351 - 375 (2006)
Few philosophers today doubt the importance of some notion of rigid designation, as suggested by Kripke and Putnam for names and natural kind terms. At the very least, most of us want our theories to be compatible with the most plausible elements of that account. Anaphoric theories of reference have gained some attention lately, but little attention has been given to how they square with rigid designation. Although the differences between anaphoric theories and many interpretations of the New Theory of reference are substantial, I argue that rigid designation and anaphoric theories can be reconciled with one another and in fact complement one another in important ways.
Keywords rigid designation  anaphora  Kripke  Putnam  Brandom
Categories (categorize this paper)
 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: 14,804
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
Robert Brandom (1984). Reference Explained Away. Journal of Philosophy 81 (9):469-492.
Michael Devitt (1981). Designation. Columbia University Press.

View all 11 references

Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

48 ( #63,854 of 1,707,645 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

12 ( #54,927 of 1,707,645 )

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.