creativesoul

I can't make much sense of the first statement. As far as the question goes, the example shows that the description "the individual named 'Nixon'" doe...

If you have an example of successful reference which does not include what I've set out, I'd like to se it. If you do not, then all you've done is gra...

I would bet that "Jack Kennedy" has far more emotional/familial connections to Jack Kennedy and his remaining family than "John Kennedy" does... My fr...

Did you read the OP?

One can successfully refer to each and every individual particular conception of counterfactual by virtue of talking about the name(counterfactual) an...

Some notions of counterfactual are rubbish. Simply put, being counter to fact is existentially dependent upon prior facts.

What problems of reference and sense? :joke:

Worst case, pointing is part of naming.

Directing one's attention by virtue of pointing is language use. Sign language is language. I'm not sure whether or not pointing alone guarantees that...

There is no issue with my premisses. I said "perhaps". Originally I included "arguably"... It doesn't matter unless pointing alone is sufficient/adequ...

I don't think we were making the same point. You're talking about the rules of thinking about thought/belief:What we're doing here... now... You're th...

I said precisely what I meant. From the very beginning of rudimentary, elementary, and/or otherwise basic thought/belief formation throughout the ends...

Having the same referent is not equivalent to meaning the same thing...

:rofl:

You covered nothing... It's not about the overrated use/mention distinction...

You're describing that which had already been named and described. The referent is not identified by the name "Nixon"? Really now? Which person are we...

The author above uses 'Nixon might not have been named Nixon' as a means for critiquing an imaginary opponent. Nixon might not have been named "Nixon"...

Nixon might not have been called "Nixon"... :roll: Nixon might not have been Nixon... There's a difference here. The first makes perfect sense. The se...

That is Nixon. "The man named Nixon" is no less and/or no more capable of picking Nixon out of this world than "Nixon" is.

Amidst substantive revision...

....

In light of the actual world... "The person named 'Nixon'" can be successfully used as a means to pick a person named Nixon out even if more than one ...

1a.)"using naming practices without ever having used descriptive practices" 1b.)"using naming practices without using descriptive practices" 2a.)"usin...

The tree is not existentially dependent upon being named.

If the thing named "X" existed in it's entirety prior to our calling it by name. then it makes no sense at all to say that the referent of "X" is exis...

If the meaning of a name is equivalent to "the thing named 'X'" then the descriptor "the thing named 'X'" should be able to stand in place of the name...

If we can successfully pick an individual out to the exclusion of all others by name, by description, or by both - in this world - then it doesn't mak...

The deeper issue is this:Do rigid designators exist in their entirety prior to our calling them such, prior to our account of them? Are they discovere...

Well methodology is certainly a big part of the problem, but I don't think that that report quite captures it. It runs much deeper than the scope of t...

Possibilities are not facts on my view. That's a quibble. Kripke talks like that too... Contingent facts... I guess...???

"The man named 'Nixon'" and "Nixon" both pick out Nixon. I'm not suggesting that the former is rigid. Rather, I'm pointing out that either and/or both...

Both refer to the man named "Nixon", necessarily so. Both do not necessarily pick out the same referent. Nixon could have had another name. Someone el...

Logic is supposed to take proper account of thoughts and belief. Logic is the rules of correct inference. For those others who may be so inclined... I...

I consider that in light of stronger ground. Given that the facts clearly demonstrate the actual difference between them regarding everyday use for re...

Specific examples of successful reference do not include a proper name. Specific examples of successful reference do not include description. No examp...

There are actual cases of using descriptive practices to successfully refer, to successfully pick something out, to bring another's attention to the s...

This is written as if you're referring to the claim itself. Not all cases of successful reference include overt proper name usage.

This is based upon the dubious presupposition that all thought can roughly equate to words. Roughly? If thought is equal to words, and a creature has ...

Some folk believe that it is possible for a language less creature to think along conceptual lines... :yikes: When further questioned, some folk adama...

They weren't given. What you've suggested as thought/belief content of a language less creature is a complex language expression. The child has no lan...

You're referring to an expression, then calling that expression a DD(using names), and then further describing it by pointing out that it contains not...

:wink:

There are no empty names. It is itself the name of a empty category. An empty container called "empty names". Other than that, the question doesn't ma...

The referent. That which is given a name. Suppose we place ten pictures on a table. One of them is Santa Claus(with suit, sled, and reindeer). All oth...

But... descriptive practices are existentially dependent upon naming practices. That is... where there has never been naming practices, there could ne...

:wink:

Sure. "It" is the subject of that sentence. I'm just attempting to offer a bit of justification for warning you about the particular framework you wer...

No. The term "it" is standing in place for something else(the actual situation, the events at the time of utterance, what's happening), but referents ...

I do not object to the ability of DD to successfully pick a unique 'thing' out to the exclusion of all others. I object to the idea that definite desc...

Well, it's a matter of what such rudimentary thought and belief are capable of actually having as their content... The reason why not is because it is...