@misc{Lexicon of Arguments, title = {Quotation from: Lexicon of Arguments – Concepts - Ed. Martin Schulz, 29 Mar 2024}, author = {Kripke,Saul A.}, subject = {Reference}, note = {I 71 Reference/Kripke: the reference of the name is not determined by a description, but by a "causal" chain of communication. I 109 Kripke: the relevant element is the actual chain of communication, not the way the speaker came about his reference. >Speaker meaning, >Speaker intention, >Speaker reference, >referential/attributive. I 123 Baptism: baptism has a correct causal chain, but: it has added conditions and no personal knowledge. It is generally not the case that the reference of a name is determined by identifying the specific characteristics, through certain properties that the referee alone meets and of which the speaker knows or believes that they apply. I 147f Reference: "water is H2O", "light is a photon flux" or "heat is the motion of molecules": if I refer to heat, then I do not refer to an inner sensation someone may have, but to external phenomenon which we perceive through our sense of perception. It caused the characteristic sensation that we call the sensation of heat. I 149 Reference: we determine what light is by the fact that it is the one thing in the outside world that affects our eyes in a certain way. I 154 In the case of proper names, the reference can be defined in various ways. Establishing reference: is done a priori (contingent) - not synonymous. Meaning: meaning is analytic (and required). Definition: the definition specifies reference and expresses truth a priori. --- II 211 Reference: e.g. "Her husband is kind to her"/Kripke: variant: the (absent) husband is not nice. Then the statement is false for all authors (because of the absent husband). There is a distinction between speaker reference and semantic reference. II 221 Goedel-Schmidt Case/Kripke: description does not determine the reference - we would not withdraw the name when we learn something new. II 231f Kripke thesis: Donnellan's distinction referential/attributive. Generalized: a speaker can believe that his/her specific intention coincides with his/her general intention in a situation for one of two reasons: a) "simple" case: his/her specific intention is to refer to the semantic referee, (by definition)(that is Donnellan's attributive use), b) "complex" case: the intentions are different, but the speaker believes that they refer to the same object (referential). VsDonnellan: one must not understand the referential as proper names. The distinction simple/complex is equally applicable to descriptions and names. >Description/Kripke, >Names/Kripke. --- Newen I 111 Direct reference/Kripke/Newen/Schrenk: Kripke calls the object theory of names the theory of direct reference.}, note = { Kripke I S.A. Kripke Naming and Necessity, Dordrecht/Boston 1972 German Edition: Name und Notwendigkeit Frankfurt 1981 Kripke II Saul A. Kripke "Speaker’s Reference and Semantic Reference", in: Midwest Studies in Philosophy 2 (1977) 255-276 In Eigennamen, Ursula Wolf, Frankfurt/M. 1993 Kripke III Saul A. Kripke Is there a problem with substitutional quantification? In Truth and Meaning, G. Evans/J McDowell, Oxford 1976 Kripke IV S. A. Kripke Outline of a Theory of Truth (1975) In Recent Essays on Truth and the Liar Paradox, R. L. Martin (Hg), Oxford/NY 1984 New II Albert Newen Analytische Philosophie zur Einführung Hamburg 2005 Newen I Albert Newen Markus Schrenk Einführung in die Sprachphilosophie Darmstadt 2008 }, file = {http://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-details.php?id=261448} url = {http://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-details.php?id=261448} }