Textbook kripkeanism and the open texture of concepts

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 81 (1):98–122 (2000)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Kripke, argued like this: it seems possible that E; the appearance can't be explained away as really pertaining to a "presentation" of E; so, pending a different explanation, it is possible that E. Textbook Kripkeans see in the contrast between E and its presentation intimations of a quite general distinction between two sorts of meaning. E's secondary or a posteriori meaning is the set of all worlds w which E, as employed here, truly describes. Its primary or a priori meaning is the set of all w such that if w is actual, then E is true. "Conceivability error" occurs when a primary possibility is mistaken for a secondary one. Textbook Kripkeanism is rejected on the grounds that it makes meaning too modal and modality too much a matter of meaning.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
YABTKA-2
Upload history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View other versions
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
765 ( #5,193 of 54,686 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
51 ( #13,398 of 54,686 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.