Abstract

An externalist account of exportation (inferring /de re/ belief from /de dicto/) is outlined. Kripke famously argued in /Naming and Necessity/ (1972) for his controversial thesis concerning certain English sentences that they are contingent /a priori/, in the derivative sense that the proposition semantically expressed is metaphysically contingent yet knowable /a priori/. Kripke also demonstrated that unrestricted exportation in attributions of belief is invalid. It is argued that these conclusions are, nearly enough, inconsistent. Kripke’s argument that belief exportation must be restricted points to a fallacy in his argument that his putative examples of the contingent /a priori/ are genuinely /a priori/.