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 Proper names carry two kinds of sense: a particular sense and an associated descriptive sense.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Proper names refer directly to their bearers without any mediating sense, as Kripke argues in 'Naming and Necessity' via rigid designation across possible worlds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'Virgil' rigidly designates the same individual in all possible worlds, its reference is fixed by causal-historical chains, not descriptive content that could vary or be wrong.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The 'associated descriptive sense' fails as a semantic component because users can refer successfully to Virgil while holding false or no descriptions of him.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The medieval distinction between particular and descriptive sense conflates the semantic role of a name with the psychological associations speakers contingently attach to it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Frege's own framework, which grounds the sense/reference distinction, treats sense as objective and public, not as the variable common notions different speakers happen to associate with a name.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If two speakers associate different common notions with 'Virgil'—one 'poet', another 'farmer'—the claim that both notions constitute genuine semantic sense leads to referential instability the theory cannot resolve.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The proper name signifies a particular substance and its quality (particular sense).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The proper name may also include the apprehension of something common — e.g., saying 'Virgil' calls up the common notions 'man' and 'poet' (associated sense).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.These two kinds of sense are distinct: the particular sense cannot be expressed by common notions, while the associated sense can.
      ?

      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.