If the name-referent relation were merely linguistic, there would be no explanation for why co-referential proper names can differ in cognitive value, yet this difference is a substantive logical phenomenon requiring analysis beyond convention.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

co-referential proper names(as used in logic and semantics): Different names that point to the same person or thing; for example, 'Superman' and 'Clark Kent' are co-referential because they both refer to the same character.
cognitive value(as used in philosophy of mind and semantics): The amount of new information or understanding a statement gives you; two sentences can mean the same thing but have different cognitive value if one teaches you something the other doesn't.
convention(Used to distinguish mere regularities from convention-governed regularities in the analysis of meaning.): A regularity that obtains because there is something akin to an agreement among a group of people to keep the regularity in place.
name-referent relation(as used in philosophy of language): The connection between a word (like a name) and the actual thing it points to in the world; basically, how names get their meaning by referring to specific objects or people.
substantive logical phenomenon(as used in logic and philosophy of language): A real, important pattern or issue in how logic and reasoning work that deserves serious philosophical study, not just a minor detail.

1 topic