Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Fregeans should deny Fregean descriptivism — that is, they should deny that the senses of proper names are the senses of any definite description associated with those names by speakers.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • Kripke's arguments provide strong reason to reject the view that the senses of proper names are the senses of definite descriptions associated with those names by speakers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kripke's modal arguments against descriptivism target the identification of reference-fixing descriptions with meaning, not the existence of Fregean senses per se.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Evans's 'Julius' example demonstrates that senses can be descriptive in their reference-fixing role while remaining irreducible to any description grasped by speakers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A Fregean can adopt Kripke's causal-historical insights by construing senses as objective, socially-determined modes of presentation not exhausted by any speaker's associated description.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.McDowell and Dummett both argue that Fregean senses need not be individuated by clusters of descriptions but can be constituted by recognitional capacities tied to objects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If senses are individuated by cognitive significance rather than descriptive content, Kripke's counterexamples—which target descriptive content—leave the core Fregean framework intact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.