A Unified Theory of Names
ABSTRACT: Theoreticians of names are currently split into two camps: Fregean and Millian. Fregean theorists hold that names have referent-determining senses that account for such facts as the change of content with the substitution of co-referential names and the meaningfulness of names without bearers. Their enduring problem has been to state these senses. Millian theorists deny that names have senses and take courage from Kripke's arguments that names are rigid designators. If names had senses, it seems that their referents should vary among possible worlds. However, the Millians have the enduring problem of explaining the apparent cognitive content of names. I argue that Mill's original theory, when purged of confusion, provides word-reflexive senses for names. Frege failed to notice senses of this particular sort. Moreover, it is these senses that account for names' rigid designation. When the views of Mill and Frege are understood as complementary, the problems that have faced the divided theorists of names vanish.
The division of terms into connotative and nonconnotative is, according to Mill, one of the distinctions that "go deepest into the nature of language." (1) The importance of this distinction was reaffirmed by Saul Kripke in Naming and Necessity. Kripke followed Mill in holding that proper names must be understood as nonconnotative. To insist on this classification was, on Kripke's view, to reject the powerfully supported view of names that originated with Frege. (2) Since the publication of Kripke's lectures theories of names have come to be thought of as divided into two opposing types-Fregean and Millian.
This opposition of theories has impeded the development of a satisfacto...
... middle of paper ...
...
(2) Saul A. Kripke, Naming and Necessity (Boston: Harvard University Press, 1980), 26-27.
(3) Gottlob Frege, "On Sense and Meaning," in Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege, 3d ed., ed. Peter Geach and Max Black (Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield, 1980), 57.
(4) Mill, 34.
(5) Ibid., 35.
(6) Ibid., 36.
(7) Ibid., 37.
(8) Ibid., 38.
(9) Frege, "On Sense and Meaning," 56.
(10) Ibid., 57-58.
(11) Ibid., 58n.
(12) Ibid., 58.
(13) Frege, "On Concept and Object," 46n.
(14) Kripke, 68-70.
(15) Note that 'the bearer of "Socrates"' is a rigid description, a connotative term, synonymous with the nonconnotative term 'Socrates'.
(16) Pauline Jacobson, "The Syntax/Semantics Interface in Categorial Grammar," in The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, ed. Shalom Lappin (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1996), 90.
For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, most local, citizenly, and patriotic of philosophers; and yet the most self-regarding of Athenians. Exploring that contradiction, between Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen and Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society, will help to position Plato's Socrates in an Athenian legal and historical context; it allows us to reunite Socrates the literary character and Athens the democratic city that tried and executed him. Moreover, those help us to understand Plato¡¦s presentation of the strange legal and ethical drama.
Carey, Bjorn. "El Chupacabra Mystery Solved: Case of Mistaken Identity."LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 22 Mar. 2011. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.
Hill, Jane H., P. J. Mistry, and Lyle Campbell. The Life of Language: Papers in Linguistics in Honor of William Bright. Berlin [etc.: Mouton De Gruyter, 1998. Print.
In chapter three there is a somewhat disparate side of the ontological argument. It centers on the nature of God than the meaning of him. Particularly, this chapter centers on the early quality of God that is the fact that he needs to exist. Inanimate things, supplementary living things, and humans are ...
First, I want to discuss some terms Socrates uses and how he defines them. Socrates defines the function of something as what only it can do or what it does better than anything else. For example, the function of a screwdriver would be to screw and/or unscrew. A screwdriver may now be the only thing that can screw or unscrew but it can better than anything else. Similarly, a blow dryer’s function is to dry hair, a person could dry their hair other ways, but a blow dryer dries hair better than anything else. Socrates
ABSTRACT: At issue is the reliability of Heidegger’s contention that Greek thinking, especially Plato’s, was constricted by an unthought "pre-ontology." "The meaning of being" supposedly guiding and controlling Greek ontology is "Being = presence." This made "the question of the meaning of ousia itself" inaccessible to the Greeks. Heidegger’s Plato’s Sophist is his most extensive treatment of a single dialogue. To test his own reliability, he proposes "to demonstrate, by the success of an actual interpretation of [the Gigantomachia], that this sense of Being [as presence] in fact guided [Plato’s] ontological questioning . . .". I will show Heidegger’s strategy in connecting what he takes to be Plato’s naive pre-ontology — Being = Presence — to the ontology of the Gigantomachia — Being = Power. I will show that Heidegger blatantly misreads the text to make the connection: he completely misses the distinction between bodies and bodiless things. The text makes sense, I will show, if and only if its explicit ontology — Being = Power — is its implicit pre-ontology. Plato wrote his text not to discuss, but to exemplify, Heidegger’s ontology-preontology distinction. He wrote the Gigantomachia for Heidegger, but Heidegger missed it.
John Locke's, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690), was first criticized by the philosopher and theologian, John Norris of Bemerton, in his "Cursory Reflections upon a Book Call'd, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding," and appended to his Christian Blessedness or Discourses upon the Beatitudes (1690). Norris's criticisms of Locke prompted three replies, which were only posthumously published. Locke has been viewed, historically, as the winner of this debate; however, new evidence has emerged which suggests that Norris's argument against the foundation of knowledge in sense-perception that the Essay advocated was a valid and worthy critique, which Locke did, in fact, take rather seriously. Charlotte Johnston's "Locke's Examination of Malebranche and John Norris" (1958), has been widely accepted as conclusively showing that Locke's replies were not philosophical, but rather personal in origin; her essay, however, overlooks critical facts that undermine her subjective analysis of Locke's stance in relation to Norris's criticisms of the Essay. This paper provides those facts, revealing the philosophical—not personal—impetus for Locke's replies.
(11) J. Souilhé, Étude sur le terme ΔΥΝΑΜIΣ dans les dialogues de Platon (Paris: Librairie Félix Alcon, 1919) cf. p. 36, 112, 154 ff..
In “The Apology” and “Euthyphro”, Plato creates a picture of the principles Socrates has on philosophy and wisdom. Since there are know direct pieces of literature written by Socrates, all of the information about him are composed by other Philosophers who encountered him. So when I refer to Socrates, it means the character depicted by Plato. I will argue that some important characteristics of philosophy and being a philosopher is evident by comparing Socrates with Euthyphro because of how he sees knowledge is obtained combined with the impact with which religion has on society.
This article gives some examples of crimes and how they were solved using a psychology technique along with how criminal profiling is used to solve crimes and how the profilers know how to slim down the suspects. In the first case, there was a man that planted bombs in multiple places each time writing a note in block letters- signing it F.P. The first bomb was found in 1940, in 1954 he struck four times, and in 1955 five times. In
Criminal profiling has become a very popular and controversial topic. Profiling is used in many different ways to identify a suspect or offender in a criminal investigation. “Criminal profiling is the process of using behavioral and scientific evidence left at a crime scene to make inferences about the offender, including inferences about personality characteristics and psychopathology” (Torres, Boccaccini, & Miller, 2006, p. 51). “The science of profiling rests on two foundation blocks, basic forensic science and empirical behavioral research. Forensic science includes blood spatter analysis, crime scene reconstruction, and autopsy evidence. Empirical behavioral research identifies offender typologies, relates crime behaviors to suspect identifiers, and determines base rates” (Cook & Hinman, 1999, p. 239). Criminal profiling is the main subject of many books, television shows, and movies for entertainment purposes, which is why it is typically more fiction than fact. I think that this could be a logical reason as to why criminal profiling is so widely used and why it is largely misunderstood and misinterpreted. Movies and television shows portray criminal profiling as 100% accurate and widely accepted. Profiling is typically shown in cases that involve violent crimes such as murder and rape. Contrary to popular belief, criminal profiling is applied to every type of crime not just murder (Bartol & Bartol, 2012). Most of the studies conducted about criminal profiling focus of those of violent criminals (Cook & Hinman, 1999). With that said, criminal profiling of serial killers has intrigued people more than any other investigative technique. I believe this is because people find murderers more interesting than thieves. The entertai...
... a criminal matter nor a strain on the Athenian society, but a challenge to an oppressive and aristocracy ruling class. Socrates became a symbol of true wisdom and knowledge, a symbol that needed to be disposed of for the elites to remain the power holders in society.
In the 1960’s, people actually believed that psychology was simple minded and unnecessary, so, becoming a criminal profiler back in the day definitely involved difficulties. Little did Teten and Mullany know that they would change the was law informants works forever. (Susssex Publishers, 1991-2016). Although criminal profiling was not utilized until the 19th century by Dr. Thomas Bond. He wrote a description on the legendary “Jack The Ripper” describing how he may act or look. Even after all of the work he done he or anyone else to this day has been able to find out who Jack the Ripper was.
Nails, Debra, N. (2005, September 16). Socrates. Stanford University. Retrieved November 11, 2013, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socrates/
In the opening section of the Investigations, Wittgenstein gave a simple statement as ‘a particular picture of the essence of human language’. The individual words of language name objects sentences are combinations of such names. In this picture of language we find the roots of the following idea: Every word has a meaning. This meaning is correlated with the word. It is the object for which the word stands (PI 1). It means there is a relationship between words and objects through language. We might say that in the case of word and object it is one of meaning- the meaning of a word being ‘the object for which the word stands’. The meaning seems to depend, rather, on the meanings of the words making up the sentence.