Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Naming and Necessity: Lectures Given to the Princeton University Philosophy Colloquium.Saul A. Kripke - 1980 - Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Edited by Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel.
    A transcript of three lectures, given at Princeton University in 1970, which deals with (inter alia) debates concerning proper names in the philosophy of language.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1538 citations  
  • (4 other versions)Naming and Necessity.S. Kripke - 1972 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 45 (4):665-666.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2769 citations  
  • Beyond rigidity: the unfinished semantic agenda of Naming and necessity.Scott Soames - 2002 - New York: Oxford University Press.
    In this fascinating work, Scott Soames offers a new conception of the relationship between linguistic meaning and assertions made by utterances. He gives meanings of proper names and natural kind predicates and explains their use in attitude ascriptions. He also demonstrates the irrelevance of rigid designation in understanding why theoretical identities containing such predicates are necessary, if true.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   399 citations  
  • (1 other version)Meaning and reference.Hilary Putnam - 1973 - Journal of Philosophy 70 (19):699-711.
    UNCLEAR as it is, the traditional doctrine that the notion "meaning" possesses the extension/intension ambiguity has certain typical consequences. The doctrine that the meaning of a term is a concept carried the implication that mean- ings are mental entities. Frege, however, rebelled against this "psy- chologism." Feeling that meanings are public property-that the same meaning can be "grasped" by more than one person and by persons at different times-he identified concepts (and hence "intensions" or meanings) with abstract entities rather than (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   399 citations  
  • (1 other version)Meaning and Reference.Hilary Putnam - 2011 - In Robert B. Talisse & Scott F. Aikin, The Pragmatism Reader: From Peirce Through the Present. Princeton University Press. pp. 299-308.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   242 citations  
  • Structured propositions and complex predicates.Jeffrey C. King - 1995 - Noûs 29 (4):516-535.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   64 citations  
  • Rigid Application.Michael Devitt - 2005 - Philosophical Studies 125 (2):139-165.
    Kripke defines a rigid designator as one that designates the same object in every possible world in which that object exists. He argues that proper names are rigid. So also, he claims, are various natural kind terms. But we wonder how they could be. These terms are general and it is not obvious that they designate at all. It has been proposed that these kind terms rigidly designate abstract objects. This proposal has been criticized because all terms then seem to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   53 citations  
  • Rigidity and kind.Joseph LaPorte - 2000 - Philosophical Studies 97 (3):293-316.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   60 citations  
  • Are General Terms Rigid?Nathan Salmon - 2004 - Linguistics and Philosophy 28 (1):117 - 134.
    On Kripke’s intended definition, a term designates an object x rigidly if the term designates x with respect to every possible world in which x exists and does not designate anything else with respect to worlds in which x does not exist. Kripke evidently holds in Naming and Necessity, hereafter N&N (pp. 117–144, passim, and especially at 134, 139–140), that certain general terms – including natural-kind terms like ‘‘water’’ and ‘‘tiger’’, phenomenon terms like ‘‘heat’’ and ‘‘hot’’, and color terms like (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   41 citations  
  • Rigidity and essentiality.M. Gómez-Torrente - 2006 - Mind 115 (1):227--59.
    Is there a theoretically interesting notion that is a natural extension of the concept of rigidity to general terms? Such a notion ought to satisfy two Kripkean conditions. First, it must apply to typical general terms for natural kinds, stuffs, and phenomena, and fail to apply to most other general terms. Second, true 'identification sentences' (such as 'Cats are animals') containing general terms that the notion applies to must be necessary. I explore a natural extension of the notion of rigidity (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   31 citations  
  • Rigidity and general terms.Genoveva Marti - 2004 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 104 (1):131-148.
    In this paper I examine two ways of defining the rigidity of general terms. First I discuss the view that rigid general terms express essential properties. I argue that the view is ultimately unsatisfactory, although not on the basis of the standard objections raised against it. I then discuss the characterisation in terms of sameness of designation in every possible world. I defend that view from two objections but I argue that the approach, although basically right, should be interpreted cautiously.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   32 citations  
  • (1 other version)What Are Natural Kinds?Scott Soames - 2014 - In Analytic Philosophy in America: And Other Historical and Contemporary Essays. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. pp. 265-280.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • (1 other version)What Are Natural Kinds?Scott Soames - 2007 - Philosophical Topics 35 (1-2):329-342.
    Though the question is ontological, I will approach it through another, partially linguistic, question. What must natural kinds be like, if the conventional wisdom about natural kind terms is correct? Although answering this question won’t tell us everything we want to know, it will, I think, be useful in narrowing the range of feasible ontological alternatives. I will therefore summarize what I take to be the contemporary linguistic wisdom, and then test different proposals about kinds against it. As we will (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • General terms as designators : a defence of the view.Genoveva Martí & José Martínez-Fernández - 2010 - In Helen Beebee & Nigel Sabbarton-Leary, The Semantics and Metaphysics of Natural Kinds. New York: Routledge. pp. 46--63.
    We argue that the view that kind terms designate universals does not fall prey to the trivialization problem. We also argue that the view can respond to other challenges, specifically, the claims that an adequate notion of rigidity for kind terms must: (a) classify natural kind terms as rigid and classify many other general terms as non-rigid and (b) account for the necessity of true theoretical identifications involving rigid terms.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations