Egosum— Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 Have any of you read Kripke's Naming and Necessity? In his Naming and Necessity, Kripke argues that proper names are rigid designations. Rigid designations designate the same object in all possible worlds in which that object exists. Conversely, descriptive clusters (not proper names, or just a description of someone) do not designate the same object in all possible worlds. For example: George W. Bush refers to the same object in all possible worlds in which that object exists. However, the 43rd president of the United States does not refer to the same object in all possible worlds. Someone else could have been the 43rd president of the United States. It is not, however, the case that George W. Bush is not George W. Bush. possible world 1: says that p2's x is not x, but Y. possible world 2: says that p1's x is not x, but Y. nevertheless, possible world 2: y refers to the same object in p1, which is x. nevertheless, possible world 1: x refers to the same object in p1, which is y. Y=X. Y=X is not a priori. I haven't studied symbolic logic yet in college, and haven't read the entire book because it's not available here.. I have to wait till I get back to school where my college bookstore will purchase it for my Post-Kant class... Anyone study this and want to chip in to help a fellow student learn and understand it more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2046 Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 I don't know if it helps, but there is a book on Rand and Kripke by Browne which was reviewed and discussed in the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies: Reference and Necessity: A Rand-Kripke Synthesis? The ‘Grotesque’ Dichotomies Still Unbeautified A Beauty Contest for Dichotomies: Browne’s Terminological Revolutions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grames Posted December 30, 2011 Report Share Posted December 30, 2011 For example: George W. Bush refers to the same object in all possible worlds in which that object exists. Kripke is wrong and useless anyway because "George W. Bush" refers to multiple persons even in this actual world, and who knows how many additional people in possible worlds. Check a phone number listing (pick a state any state). Even names are contextual. Kripke's "rigid designators" seem to be a way to get back to an absolute/intrinsic/Platonic Form for at least names. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.