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
    The Millian-Russellian holds that the content of a proper... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Sentences (17) and (18) do not differ in meaning

    The Millian-Russellian holds that the content of a proper name is the object to which that name refers

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

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    'Clark Kent' and 'Superman' are proper names that refer to the same object

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Sentences (17) and (18) differ only by substitution of 'Clark Kent' for 'Superma...
    Sentences (17) and (18) do not differ in meaning
    Substitution of expressions with the same content cannot change the meaning of a...

    Similar

    The Millian-Russellian holds that the content of a name is its referen...90%The reference of a proper name is the object itself87%The sense of a proper name is objective, not merely subjective like an...83%Because proper names share the same semantic properties as common name...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: meaning
    View source passageHide passage
    According to the Millian-Russellian, (17) and (18) differ only in the substitution of expressions with have the same content: after all, “Clark Kent” and “Superman” are proper names which refer to the same object, and the Millian-Russellian holds that the content of a proper name is the object to which that name refers. But this is a surprising result. These sentences seem to differ in meaning, because (17) seems to express a trivial, obvious claim, whereas (18) seems to express a non-trivial, p

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective