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
    The reduplication argument demonstrates that descriptive ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The reduplication argument alone does not settle how much of our thought is direct reference versus thought by description.

    The reduplication argument demonstrates that descriptive content cannot individuate the referent, which entails direct reference is the default mode for singular thought.

    ?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.Reduplication cases show two subjects with identical descriptive content can have different referents, proving descriptions alone don't determine reference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If descriptions individuated referents, there could be no cases of thought-content mismatch between what we think and what we refer to.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Direct reference via causal chains explains how we successfully refer to objects despite incomplete or false descriptive beliefs about them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Reduplication arguments only show descriptions are insufficient, not that direct reference is the *default* rather than one mechanism among several.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Most singular thoughts about ordinary objects rely on recognitional capacities and practical mastery, not purely direct causal reference chains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The argument conflates reference-fixing (how we identify objects) with reference-determining (what makes a thought about that object), wrongly concluding direct reference for both.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Direct reference via causal chains explains how we successfully refer to objects...If descriptions individuated referents, there could be no cases of thought-conte...Most singular thoughts about ordinary objects rely on recognitional capacities a...Reduplication arguments only show descriptions are insufficient, not that direct...
    +3 moreShow less
    Reduplication cases show two subjects with identical descriptive content can hav...The argument conflates reference-fixing (how we identify objects) with reference...The reduplication argument alone does not settle how much of our thought is dire...

    Details

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