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
    Two co-referential names can differ in cognitive signific... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Romeo likes Juliet (L(r,j)).

    Two co-referential names can differ in cognitive significance, so L(r,j) underdetermines the propositional content expressed by 'Romeo likes Juliet' in natural language.

    ?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.Frege showed that 'Morning Star' and 'Evening Star' have different cognitive significance despite identical reference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A competent speaker can understand 'Romeo likes Juliet' while ignorant of which names co-refer, suggesting reference alone is insufficient.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Natural language meaning includes how speakers grasp content, not just extensional facts about what terms denote.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The claim conflates meaning with associated descriptions or modes of presentation, which may not be part of semantic content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If L(r,j) fully specifies the proposition, cognitive significance differences reflect speaker psychology, not content underdetermination.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Names in logic typically function as rigid designators whose reference exhausts their semantic contribution to propositional content.
      ?

      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 linked claim · 2 topics

    Modality & Possibility1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked
    Romeo likes Juliet (L(r,j)).

    Related

    A competent speaker can understand 'Romeo likes Juliet' while ignorant of which ...Frege showed that 'Morning Star' and 'Evening Star' have different cognitive sig...If L(r,j) fully specifies the proposition, cognitive significance differences re...Names in logic typically function as rigid designators whose reference exhausts ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Natural language meaning includes how speakers grasp content, not just extension...Romeo likes Juliet (L(r,j)).The claim conflates meaning with associated descriptions or modes of presentatio...

    Details

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