Skip to content

Topics Thinkers Changes ContributorsLoading 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

Made within

DC&

Austin

Statements: 321,452
Perspectives: 108,905
Topics: 42

If 'this' and 'that' referred purely directly with no des... — Carmelics

History Edit See Inverse

Part of a larger discussion

Challenges→Logically proper names such as 'this' and 'that' must refer directly to objects rather than via descriptive content

If 'this' and 'that' referred purely directly with no descriptive content, two uses referring to the same object would be cognitively interchangeable, which they demonstrably are not.

?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.Demonstrably, 'the morning star' and 'the evening star' refer to Venus yet have different cognitive significance to users unaware of the identity.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Pure direct reference would collapse the distinction between knowing what object is referred to and understanding how it's being characterized.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.Indexicals like 'this' and 'that' require contextual descriptive content (location, salience, temporal frame) to determine their referent.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

1 perspective

Reason against

?

1.Cognitive non-interchangeability may reflect speaker psychology rather than semantic content—demonstrating epistemic asymmetry, not referential non-directness.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Indexicals succeed as direct references precisely because context supplies reference-fixing content, not because the reference itself is descriptive.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.The claim conflates what speakers must do to use indexicals with what indexicals semantically contribute—conflating pragmatics with semantics.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

Next step

Based on where you are in your exploration

Strongest counterpoint

Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

Key Terms

Cognitively interchangeable(as used in epistemology and meaning): Able to be swapped for each other without any difference in meaning or thought—if two phrases are cognitively interchangeable, thinking about one is exactly the same as thinking about the other.
Demonstrably(indicating that the evolutionary change can actually be shown to happen): Proven or shown clearly through evidence that can be observed or tested.
Refer/reference(both uses of 'this' refer to (point to) the same ship, even though they point at different parts): When a word or phrase points to or stands for something in the real world.
descriptive content(Putnam's characterization, contrasted with causal theories of reference): At its simplest, 'what is in one's head'

Connections

1 topic

Philosophy of Language1 linked

Related

Cognitive non-interchangeability may reflect speaker psychology rather than sema...Demonstrably, 'the morning star' and 'the evening star' refer to Venus yet have ...Indexicals like 'this' and 'that' require contextual descriptive content (locati...Indexicals succeed as direct references precisely because context supplies refer...

+3 moreShow less

Logically proper names such as 'this' and 'that' must refer directly to objects ...Pure direct reference would collapse the distinction between knowing what object...

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 2 (1 for, 1 against)
Edits: 1 edit

The claim conflates what speakers must do to use indexicals with what indexicals...