Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Mill argued in 'A System of Logic' that proper names are 'non-connotative': they denote individuals but do not imply any attribute of those individuals.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
We identify and distinguish individuals partly through their properties; some minimal descriptive content seems built into proper name use and learning.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Names like 'Aristotle' or 'Napoleon' carry historical-descriptive baggage that shapes how speakers use them, suggesting some connotation is present.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Mill's distinction between connotation and denotation may be too rigid; names could have conventional associations without strict logical connotation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Proper names successfully refer to individuals across contexts where their attributes change, suggesting reference doesn't depend on fixed attributes.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If names connotated attributes, we couldn't meaningfully learn new facts about named individuals without changing what the name means.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Names function identically whether the bearer has few or many known attributes, implying attributes are external to the name's core meaning.
?
How convincing is this?
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.