본문 바로가기
  • Home
Basic Search

Criticism on Kripke’s Theory of Rigid Reference and Hermeneutic Probability

Sungno Youn 1

1숭실대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

The main purpose of this paper is to review critically the theory of referential rigidity by Kripke on the one hand, and to propose an alternative of hermeneutic probability on the other hand. For that matter we begin by introducing Russell’s descriptivist theory of reference in order to explain what are the first and second genesis of proposition. It is also necessary for us to show why Kripke coins the key concept of rigid designator and makes a difference between rigidity “de facto” for rigidity “de jure” as well as strong necessity and weak necessity. We think the exposé made this way offers a better way of understanding that a proper name does not have the same meaning as the corresponding definite description, contrary to Russell’s thought. These themes constitute the first part of this article. Its second part is dedicated to putting into question Kripke’ theory of rigidity. First we account for the reason why an interactionnist theory of language is better than its nominalist or ego-centered perspective one. It is also relevant for us to adopt an evolutionary viewpoint in order to emphasize the fuzziness of categories. Furthermore some problems are indicated that may well occur if one does not carefully distinguish things like ontological entity, categorial attributes one gives to that entity, propositional content by means of which the attributes are expressed, and propositional attitude the speaker adopt with respect to what she says. The final point of the second part of this paper lies in demonstrating that such an identity statement as “Hesperus and Phosphorus are the same planet” might represent the metaphysically necessary truth but not a posteriori attested one, a counter-argument which goes against Kripke’s. In the third part of this paper, we try to support our thesis that words do not designate rigidly but in a manner of hermeneutic probability on the basis of quantum physics, theory of prototype, and metaphor regarded as fundamental cognitive mechanism. In conclusion our position is made clear concerning relations among language, mind, world.

Statistics

  • 479 Viewed
  • 229 Downloaded

Tools

Issue List

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Basic Search Advanced Search