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
    Proper (uniquely referring) descriptions behave like prop... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Proper (uniquely referring) descriptions behave like proper names (singular terms of logic)

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If there is just one F, then 'The F is F' is true
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the F equals the G, and the F is H, then the G is H
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.These theorems follow from the logic of quantifiers and identity alone
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Proper names are rigid designators that refer to the same individual across all possible worlds, regardless of which descriptions that individual satisfies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Definite descriptions are non-rigid: 'the inventor of bifocals' picks out different individuals in worlds where Franklin never invented bifocals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If names and descriptions have fundamentally different modal profiles, they cannot be logically equivalent singular terms, contra Russell's assimilation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege's puzzle shows that 'Hesperus is Phosphorus' is informative in a way 'Hesperus is Hesperus' is not, which Russell's theory cannot explain without invoking distinct cognitive significance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If descriptions behaved like genuine proper names, substituting co-referring descriptions would always preserve cognitive significance, but 'the evening star is the morning star' remains empirically surprising.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the logical equivalence Russell posits obscures a semantically crucial distinction between object-directed reference and descriptive satisfaction conditions.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Definite descriptions are non-rigid: 'the inventor of bifocals' picks out differ...Frege's puzzle shows that 'Hesperus is Phosphorus' is informative in a way 'Hesp...If descriptions behaved like genuine proper names, substituting co-referring des...If names and descriptions have fundamentally different modal profiles, they cann...
    +5 moreShow less
    If the F equals the G, and the F is H, then the G is HIf there is just one F, then 'The F is F' is trueProper names are rigid designators that refer to the same individual across all ...Therefore the logical equivalence Russell posits obscures a semantically crucial...These theorems follow from the logic of quantifiers and identity alone

    Similar

    Natural kind terms function referentially in ways analogous to proper ...79%A proper name like 'Smith' can be used with referential intentions tha...79%Numerical singular terms are genuine singular terms.79%The sense of a name is a condition which the referent uniquely satisfi...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: logical-construction
    View source passageHide passage
    Russell’s theory of descriptions was introduced in his paper “On Denoting” (Russell 1905) published in the journal Mind. Russell’s theory provides the logical form of sentences of the form ‘The \(F\) is \(G\)’ where ‘The \(F\)’ is called a definite description in contrast with ‘An F’ which is an indefinite description. The analysis proposes that ‘The \(F\) is \(G\)’ is equivalent to ‘There is one and only one \(F\) and it is \(G\)’. Given this account, the logical properties of descriptions can
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit