DOCSLIB.ORG

What Is De Re & De Dicto?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
What Is De Re & De Dicto? De re is less favorable than de dicto –An experimental investigation of belief report Yuhan Zhang & Kathryn Davidson [email protected] PLC 2020, March 27th – 29th 1 Introduction to the de re & de dicto distinctions Content Motivations for the empirical investigation The agreement rating experiment Results and implications 2 Latin origin de re: “about the thing” de dicto: “about the statement” Nowadays, when a DP appears inside a clausal or VP complement of an intensional operator, we say that de re & de dicto ambiguity can be observed in this interaction. What is de re (1) Mary wants to marry a fisherman. & de dicto ? Truth condition of de re : Mary wants to marry John. I know John is a fisherman. To report Mary’s desire, I utter (1). This sentence is also true even if John’s secret job is fisherman and Mary doesn’t know this. Truth condition of de dicto : Mary wants to marry whoever is a fisherman. Mary might not have a particular person in her mind, but she is definitely sure that her future husband’s occupation would be fisherman. von Fintel & Heim, 2011; Cable, 2018 3 The ambiguities do not arise from the DP itself, but from the interaction between the DP and the intensional operator. DPs interact (1) Mary wants to marry a fisherman. (ambiguous) with the (2) Mary marries a fisherman. (unambiguous) Other types of DP/IO: intensional DP: indefinite NP, definite NP, proper name, QNP, someone, etc. operator Intensional operator: Psychological attitude verb, epistemic verb, perceptual verb, communication verb, model auxiliary, model adverbial (Partee, 1990) Temporal adverbial (Keshet & Schwarz, 2019) 4 (3) Ralph believes that someone is a spy. (Quine, 1956) de re: There is someone whom Ralph believes to be a spy. de dicto: Ralph believes there are spies. (4) John wants to talk to the boy who faileD the exam. (FoDor, 1970) More de re: There is a boy who faileD the exam anD John wants to talk to him. examples de dicto: John wants to talk to whoever faileD the exam anD John might not know who the boy is. (5) In 1978, the presiDent acquireD a skyscraper in New York City. de re: The current president (D. Trump) acquired the skyscraper in 1978. de dicto: The president in 1978 (J. Carter) acquireD the skyscraper in 1978. 5 Crack the distinction via “a possible world evaluation strategy” Two worlds involved in this ambiguity. de re: the target DP is evaluated to be true in the real world (transparent) de dicto: the target DP is evaluated to be true in the intensional world (opaque) (1) Mary wants to marry a fisherman. Distinguishing de re: ∃x[fishermanw(x)] & ∀w’ ∈ WANT(Mary, w): marryw’(Mary)(x) de dicto: ∀w’ ∈ WANT(Mary, w): ∃x[fishermanw’ (x) & marryw’(Mary)(x)] strategies Resulting properties de re: The target DP refers to a specific entity in the real world. The belief holder might not know that this entity is denoted by the target DP. de dicto: In the belief holder’s mind/mental state, he/she knows that the entity is denoted by the target DP. Reliance on the context for distinction (von Fintel & Heim, 2011) Specific contexts could be conjured up so that only one reading is possible. There are other contexts where both readings are available. Note: The formal representation of de re & de dicto assumes the ambiguity results from the scope interaction between the DP and the intensional operator.6 This is only one of the existing theories. See Percus (2000), Keshet (2008), and Elliott (2020) for more extensions, repairs, and other treatments. Even if it is claimed that certain contexts could be made so that both readings are true, there is still an issue of acceptability or accessibility. (6) US forces in Iraq have intentionally killed 12 journalists. (Language Log, 2005) de dicto: It is the US forces’ intention to target and kill journalists. (favored) de re: The US forces were trying to kill people but they didn’t know that Problems with they were shooting at journalists. de re & de (7) Sally believes that her brother is happy. (Nelson, 2019) Context: Sally hears a man singing on the street and believes that man is dicto happy without knowing that man is her brother. judgments “The de re reading is not acceptable because Sally doesn’t conceptualize the man as her brother.” The interpretation of statute is biased towards the de re reading. (Anderson, 2013) 7 When a context permits both de re and de dicto Research readings, would people actually access both Question readings equally successfully? Null hypothesis predicted by the theories: They should be equally accessible given a context that permits both. 8 Online Agreement Rating Task Participants Experimental 120 native speakers of English (75 male/45 female) were recruiteD from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk to reaD four stories anD rate their Method agreement for four statements per story The average completion time was 9.2 minutes (+/- 5.14 min) with a $2 compensation. 9 Context Julie is one of the judges of an ongoing poetry competition. The best poem that she has read so far is an extremely intriguing poem about the ocean. She believes that this poem will win the competition. Julie remembers being told that Nicole, one of the best-known poets, submitted a poem about the ocean to the competition. Therefore, Julie concludes that this poem must be written by Nicole and the first prize will be going to her. However, this poem was actually written by Materials Elizabeth, a younger and lesser-known poet. It is just a coincidence that the two poets wrote about the same topic. Question According to this story, please use the slider bars to indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following four statements. 10 Statements (randomized in display) [target ] (only one statement is shown to each participant) Julie believes that Elizabeth’s poem will win the competition. (de re) Julie believes that Nicole’s poem will win the competition. (de dicto) [definitely correct] Elizabeth is a young poet. Materials [definitely wrong] Elizabeth and Nicole met each other and decided that they will both write poems about the ocean. [uncertain] Julie will also be the judge for the poetry competition next year. 11 Three practice statement trials Within-Subject Design Each participant read a list of four different stories.Two of them were randomly chosen to appear with de re statements and the other two with de dicto statements. The order of the four stories were randomized. Procedure The number of times each story gets the de re statement vs. the de dicto statement was counterbalanced across participants. The order of the four statements within a story was randomized. The position of the “Highly Agree” label was also counterbalanced such that only half of the time it was on the right side. 12 Data Screening Delete the participants who failed to use the slider correctly in the practice trial (117 participants remained). Delete the four data points in a story when participants gave wrong judgments of the definitely correct and definitely wrong statements (415 sets of four data points remained). The functions of the other three statements Data analysis Attention checker Baseline for comparison against the critical judgment 13 Results • The majority of de dicto and de re statements are agreed upon. • The agreement rating of de re statements are more diverse, sometimes falling in the “disagree” realm. 14 Results • A story effect exists – while all the de dicto statements were highly agreed upon across the four stories, the de re interpretation was only highly disliked in story c. 15 Results 16 Frequency de dicto de re Total agree 203 131 334 disagree 5 76 81 Statistical Total 208 207 415 inference Pearson’s Chi-squared test: X2 = 75.59, df = 1, p < .001 There is a significant condition effect where the de re reading is more likely to be disagreed. 17 Mixed effect logistic regression Use downscaled binary data (agree vs. disagree) Model: binary ~ condition + story + (1|subject) Main effect of the de re condition (ß = -3.64, z = -6.50, p < .001) Main effect of the story c (ß = -1.30, z = -2.64, p = .008) Modeling Mixed effect linear regression Use the original continuous agreement rating data Model: rating ~ condition + story + (1|subject) No main effect of any variable Could be due to ill fitness of the linear model 18 In this experiment, we conjured up four similar stories involving misidentification to gauge participants’ agreement rating to de re statements and de dicto statements. We found that while the agreement of de dicto statements were at ceiling, the de re statements were less agreed. Conclusions & The null hypothesis is rejected – there are two separate factors Discussions affecting semantic judgments: (1) the availability of a reading; (2) the accessibility of a reading. The result corresponds to the example of ‘US forces’ but not the cases in law. A main story effect also suggests that different genres of contexts might affect the accessibility of the de re & de dicto reading. 19 Create a systematic variation of contexts for comparison Create a systematic variation of NP structures See if other intensional operators (e.g. the temporal adverbial) can also generate an asymmetric accessibility of de re and de dicto Future reading. Directions Suggestions are welcome! (Feel free to drop a line to [email protected]) Acknowledgement Shannon Bryant, Gunnar Lund, Masoud Jasbi, Joshua Martin, JacK Robinovitch, Jesse SnedeKer, and members of Meaning & Modality Lab at Harvard University. 20 Anderson, J. C. (2013). Misreading like a lawyer: cognitive bias in statutory interpretation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Leibniz and the Necessity of the Best Possible World
    This is a preprint of an article whose final and definitive form will be published in the Australasian Journal of Philosophy; the Australasian Journal of Philosophy is available online at: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/. LEIBNIZ AND THE NECESSITY OF THE BEST POSSIBLE WORLD Martin Pickup Leibniz has long faced a challenge about the coherence of the distinction between necessary and contingent truths in his philosophy. In this paper, I propose and examine a new way to save genuine contingency within a Leibnizian framework. I conclude that it succeeds in formally solving the problem, but at unbearable cost. I present Leibniz’s challenge by considering God’s choice of the best possible world (Sect. 2). God necessarily exists and necessarily chooses to actualise the best possible world. The actual world therefore could not be different, for if it were different it would be a distinct and inferior world and hence would not be created. In Sect. 3 I defend Leibniz from this challenge. I argue that while it is necessary for God to choose to create the best possible world, it is not necessary for any world to be the best possible. This is because the criterion for judging perfection can itself be contingent. Different criteria will judge different worlds as the best. Thus it is necessary for God to create the best, but not necessary which is the best. Distinguishing between possible worlds in Leibniz’s sense and in the modern sense allows a fuller exposition of this position. There are worries that can arise with the claim that the criterion of perfection is contingent.
    [Show full text]
  • On Considering a Possible World As Actual
    ON CONSIDERING A POSSIBLE WORLD AS ACTUAL Robert Stalnaker “Hell is paved with primary intensions” English proverb1 1. Introduction In Naming and Necessity2, Saul Kripke presented some striking examples that convinced many philosophers that there are truths that are both necessary and a posteriori, and also truths that are both contingent and a priori. The classic examples of the former are identity statements containing proper names (Hesperus = Phosphorus) and statements about the nature of natural kinds (Gold has atomic number 79). Realistic examples of the second kind of statement are harder to come by - perhaps there are none - but once one sees the idea it is easy to construct artificial examples. The most famous example is based on Gareth Evans’s descriptive name “Julius.”3 “Julius” is, by stipulation, a proper name of the person (whoever he might be) who invented the zip. So the statement “Julius invented the zip” can be known a priori to be true, but since the description is used to fix the reference rather than to give the meaning , of the name, the fact that Julius invented the zip is a contingent fact. Someone other than Julius (the person we in fact named) might have invented the zip, and if some else had invented it instead, it would not have been true that Julius invented the zip. The divergence of the two distinctions was surprising, but the examples are simple and relatively transparent. Kripke’s exposition pointed the way to an abstract description of the phenomena that made it clear, on one level at least, what is going on.
    [Show full text]
  • Situations and Individuals
    Forthcoming with MIT Press Current Studies in Linguistics Summer 2005 Situations and Individuals Paul Elbourne To my father To the memory of my mother Preface This book deals with the semantics of the natural language expressions that have been taken to refer to individuals: pronouns, definite descriptions and proper names. It claims, contrary to previous theorizing, that they have a common syntax and semantics, roughly that which is currently associated by philosophers and linguists with definite descriptions as construed in the tradition of Frege. As well as advancing this proposal, I hope to achieve at least one other aim, that of urging linguists and philosophers dealing with pronoun interpretation, in particular donkey anaphora, to consider a wider range of theories at all times than is sometimes done at present. I am thinking particularly of the gulf that seems to have emerged between those who practice some version of dynamic semantics (including DRT) and those who eschew this approach and claim that the semantics of donkey pronouns crucially involves definite descriptions (if they consider donkey anaphora at all). In my opinion there is too little work directly comparing the claims of these two schools (for that is what they amount to) and testing them against the data in the way that any two rival theories might be tested. (Irene Heim’s 1990 article in Linguistics and Philosophy does this, and largely inspired my own project, but I know of no other attempts.) I have tried to remedy that in this book. I ultimately come down on the side of definite descriptions and against dynamic semantics; but that preference is really of secondary importance beside the attempt at a systematic comparative project.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1908.09658V1 [Cs.MA] 26 Aug 2019 Sdfrtescn Ups.I General, in Purpose
    Dynamic Term-Modal Logic for Epistemic Social Network Dynamics (Extended Version) Andrés Occhipinti Liberman1 and Rasmus K. Rendsvig2 1 DTU Compute [email protected] 2 Center for Information and Bubble Studies, University of Copenhagen [email protected] Abstract. Logics for social networks have been studied in recent liter- ature. This paper presents a framework based on dynamic term-modal logic (DTML), a quantified variant of dynamic epistemic logic (DEL). In contrast with DEL where it is commonly known to whom agent names refer, DTML can represent dynamics with uncertainty about agent iden- tity. We exemplify dynamics where such uncertainty and de re/de dicto distinctions are key to social network epistemics. Technically, we show that DTML semantics can represent a popular class of hybrid logic epis- temic social network models. We also show that DTML can encode pre- viously discussed dynamics for which finding a complete logic was left open. As complete reduction axioms systems exist for DTML, this yields a complete system for the dynamics in question. Keywords: social networks, term-modal logic, dynamic epistemic logic 1 Introduction Over recent years, several papers have been dedicated to logical studies of social networks, their epistemics and dynamics [2,10–14,18–22,24,25]. The purpose of this literature typically is to define and investigate some social dynamics with respect to e.g. long-term stabilization or other properties, or to introduce formal logics that capture some social dynamics, or both. This paper illustrates how dynamic term-modal logic (DTML, [1]) may be arXiv:1908.09658v1 [cs.MA] 26 Aug 2019 used for the second purpose.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parallel Architecture and Its Place in Cognitive Science
    978–0–19–954400–4 Heine-main-drv Heine-Narrog (Typeset by Spi, Chennai) 645 of 778 April 8, 2009 21:55 chapter 23 .............................................................................................................. THE PARALLEL ARCHITECTURE AND ITS PLACE IN COGNITIVE SCIENCE .............................................................................................................. ray jackendoff It has become fashionable recently to speak of linguistic inquiry as biolinguistics, an attempt to frame questions of linguistic theory in terms of the place of lan- guage in a biological context. The Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995; 2001)is of course the most prominent stream of research in this paradigm. However, an alternative stream within the paradigm, the Parallel Architecture, has been devel- oping in my own work over the past 30 years; it includes two important sub- components, Conceptual Structure and Simpler Syntax (Jackendoff2002; 2007b; Culicover and Jackendoff 2005). This chapter will show how the Parallel Architec- ture is in many ways a more promising realization of biolinguistic goals than the Minimalist Program and that, more than the Minimalist Program, it is conducive to integration with both the rest of linguistic theory and the rest of cognitive science. 978–0–19–954400–4 Heine-main-drv Heine-Narrog (Typeset by Spi, Chennai) 646 of 778 April 8, 2009 21:55 646 ray jackendoff 23.1 Parallel architectures, broadly conceived .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Concrete Possible Worlds (Final)
    CONCRETE POSSIBLE WORLDS Phillip Bricker 1. INTRODUCTION. Open a book or article of contemporary analytic philosophy, and you are likely to find talk of possible worlds therein. This applies not only to analytic metaphysics, but to areas as diverse as philosophy of language, philosophy of science, epistemology, and ethics. Philosophers agree, for the most part, that possible worlds talk is extremely useful for explicating concepts and formulating theories. They disagree, however, over its proper interpretation. In this chapter, I discuss the view, championed by David Lewis, that philosophers’ talk of possible worlds is the literal truth.1 There exists a plurality of worlds. One of these is our world, the actual world, the physical universe that contains us and all our surroundings. The others are merely possible worlds containing merely possible beings, such as flying pigs and talking donkeys. But the other worlds are no less real or concrete for being merely possible. Fantastic? Yes! What could motivate a philosopher to believe such a tale? I start, as is customary, with modality.2 Truths about the world divide into two sorts: categorical and modal. Categorical truths describe how things are, what is actually the case. Modal truths describe how things could or must be, what is possibly or 1 The fullest statement of Lewis’s theory of possible worlds is contained in his magnum opus, Lewis (1986), On the Plurality of Worlds. Lewis’s view is sometimes called “modal realism.” 2 Historically, it was the attempt to provide semantics for modal logic that catapulted possible worlds to the forefront of analytic philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Frege and the Logic of Sense and Reference
    FREGE AND THE LOGIC OF SENSE AND REFERENCE Kevin C. Klement Routledge New York & London Published in 2002 by Routledge 29 West 35th Street New York, NY 10001 Published in Great Britain by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane London EC4P 4EE Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper. Copyright © 2002 by Kevin C. Klement All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any infomration storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Klement, Kevin C., 1974– Frege and the logic of sense and reference / by Kevin Klement. p. cm — (Studies in philosophy) Includes bibliographical references and index ISBN 0-415-93790-6 1. Frege, Gottlob, 1848–1925. 2. Sense (Philosophy) 3. Reference (Philosophy) I. Title II. Studies in philosophy (New York, N. Y.) B3245.F24 K54 2001 12'.68'092—dc21 2001048169 Contents Page Preface ix Abbreviations xiii 1. The Need for a Logical Calculus for the Theory of Sinn and Bedeutung 3 Introduction 3 Frege’s Project: Logicism and the Notion of Begriffsschrift 4 The Theory of Sinn and Bedeutung 8 The Limitations of the Begriffsschrift 14 Filling the Gap 21 2. The Logic of the Grundgesetze 25 Logical Language and the Content of Logic 25 Functionality and Predication 28 Quantifiers and Gothic Letters 32 Roman Letters: An Alternative Notation for Generality 38 Value-Ranges and Extensions of Concepts 42 The Syntactic Rules of the Begriffsschrift 44 The Axiomatization of Frege’s System 49 Responses to the Paradox 56 v vi Contents 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyticity, Necessity and Belief Aspects of Two-Dimensional Semantics
    !"# #$%"" &'( ( )#"% * +, %- ( * %. ( %/* %0 * ( +, %. % +, % %0 ( 1 2 % ( %/ %+ ( ( %/ ( %/ ( ( 1 ( ( ( % "# 344%%4 253333 #6#787 /0.' 9'# 86' 8" /0.' 9'# 86' (#"8'# Analyticity, Necessity and Belief Aspects of two-dimensional semantics Eric Johannesson c Eric Johannesson, Stockholm 2017 ISBN print 978-91-7649-776-0 ISBN PDF 978-91-7649-777-7 Printed by Universitetsservice US-AB, Stockholm 2017 Distributor: Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Cover photo: the water at Petite Terre, Guadeloupe 2016 Contents Acknowledgments v 1 Introduction 1 2 Modal logic 7 2.1Introduction.......................... 7 2.2Basicmodallogic....................... 13 2.3Non-denotingterms..................... 21 2.4Chaptersummary...................... 23 3 Two-dimensionalism 25 3.1Introduction.......................... 25 3.2Basictemporallogic..................... 27 3.3 Adding the now operator.................. 29 3.4Addingtheactualityoperator................ 32 3.5 Descriptivism ......................... 34 3.6Theanalytic/syntheticdistinction............. 40 3.7 Descriptivist 2D-semantics .................. 42 3.8 Causal descriptivism ..................... 49 3.9Meta-semantictwo-dimensionalism............. 50 3.10Epistemictwo-dimensionalism................ 54
    [Show full text]
  • Proquest Dissertations
    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy subm itted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Bell & Howell Information and Leaming 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 UMI AN ACCOUNT OF THE JUSTIHCATION OF TESTIMONIAL BELIEFS: A RELIABILIST APPROACH DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the The Ohio State University By David Ena. M.A. The Ohio State University 2000 Dissertation Committee Approved by Professor Marshall Swain.
    [Show full text]
  • Modal Empiricism and Knowledge of De Re Possibilities: a Critique of Roca-Royes’ Account
    Organon F 22 (4) 2015: 488-498 Modal Empiricism and Knowledge of De Re Possibilities: A Critique of Roca-Royes’ Account DUŠKO PRELEVIĆ Faculty of Philosophy. University of Belgrade Čika Ljubina 18-20. 11000 Belgrade. Serbia [email protected] RECEIVED: 30-04-2015 ACCEPTED: 11-08-2015 ABSTRACT: Accounting for our knowledge of de re modalities is probably the main rea- son why the proponents of modal empiricism think that their view should be preferred to modal rationalism. In this paper, I address Sonia Roca-Royes’ account, which is tak- en to be a representative modal empiricist view, in order to show that modal empiricism faces serious problems even in explaining our knowledge of possibility de re, something which seems to be the easiest thing to explain on this view. I argue that Roca-Royes’ account does not prove what she claims it does, that it can hardly be articulated in a non-redundant way, and that her account of our knowledge of possibility de re can hardly be reconciled with the essentiality of origin principle, to which modal empiricists sometimes appeal while criticizing the modal rationalist account. KEYWORDS: De re modal knowledge – modal empiricism – modal epistemology – modal rationalism. 1. Modal rationalism and our knowledge of modality de re Modal epistemology examines possibilities and boundaries of our modal knowledge. One of the most intriguing questions in this philosophical dis- cipline is related to the knowledge of unrealized possibilities, that is, the knowledge that something is possible even if it is not realized in the actual world (or at least we do not know whether it is realized or not; see Van In- © 2015 The Author.
    [Show full text]
  • Wittgenstein's Conception of the Autonomy of Language and Its Implications for Natural Kinds
    Wittgenstein’s Conception of the Autonomy of Language and its Implications for Natural Kinds George Wrisley [email protected] NOTICE TO BORROWERS In presenting this thesis as partial fulfillment of the requirements for an advanced degree from Georgia State University, I agree that the library of the university will make it available for inspection and circulation in accordance with its regulations governing materials of this type. I agree that permission to quote from, to copy from, or to publish from this thesis may be granted by the author, by the professor under whose direction it was written, or by the Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences. Such quoting, copying or publishing must be solely for scholarly purposes and must not involve potential financial gain. It is understood that any copying from or publication of this thesis that involves potential financial gain will not be allowed without written permission of the author. ________________________________________ All dissertations and theses deposited in the Georgia State University Library may be used only in accordance with the stipulations prescribed by the author in the preceding statement. The author of this dissertation is The director of this dissertation is George Wrisley Dr. Grant Luckhardt 8081 Henderson Court Department of Philosophy Alpharetta, GA 30004 College of Arts & Sciences Wittgenstein’s Conception of the Autonomy of Language And its Implications for Natural Kinds A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University 2002 by George Wrisley Committee: ______________________________ Dr. Grant Luckhardt, Chair ______________________________ Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Zsófia Zvolenszky
    I am delighted if you decide to quote this paper—please send me an email if you do. Comments are welcome. Yours, ZZs. NAMING WITH NECESSITY Zsófia Zvolenszky Department of Logic, Institute of Philosophy, Eötvös University (ELTE), Budapest [email protected] August 15, 2007 I. INTRODUCTION Despite all the attention philosophers have been paying to Naming and Necessity , they have not realized just how apt the title is: naming and necessity are intimately connected, even more intimately then Saul Kripke has led us to believe. The conception of necessity clarified by Kripke—metaphysical or counterfactual necessity—helps us understand what our ordinary practice of using proper names is about; and proper-name usage in turn helps us understand what counterfactual situations (possible worlds) are about. My aim is to propose yet another picture: (i) inherent in proper-name usage is the expectation that names refer to modally robust individuals :1 individuals that can sustain modal predications like ‘is necessarily human’, or ‘might have discovered Goldbach’s conjecture’; (ii) these modally robust individuals are the fundamental building blocks on the basis of which possible worlds should be conceived in a modal semantics intended to mirror the conceptual apparatus behind ordinary modal talk. In Part II, I describe (i) and (ii), what I call the individual-driven picture. In Part III, I relate this picture to others. The pre-Kripkean pictures of individuals and modality were markedly different. First, there was the conception of modality as logical or analytic necessity. Second, there was the conception of possible worlds needed for physical necessity, giving rise to issues about the transworld identification of individuals.
    [Show full text]