Abstract

The aims of this essay are: to define precisely Kripke's thesis that proper names function as rigid designators, to determine exactly what it does and does not entail, and to evaluate the thesis. In general, the critical part of the essay concerns not what Kripke says but what he has not said. After demonstrating certain inadequacies and lacunas in Kripke's picture of reference by name, I work to correct the flaws and fill in the gaps, toward the end of a more thorough account of the semantics of proper names