The world of semantics is dominated by two types of naming theories: descriptivist and causal. Defenders of these two theories seem to discredit each other, thinking the world of semantics must choose one or the other. I, however, do not believe this has to be the case. In this essay I will argue that parts of descriptivist and causal theories of names can come together to create a better overall theory of names: a hybrid theory. I will do this by looking at the argument Gareth Evans makes in his article, “the Causal Theory of Names”. To preface my idea of what a theory of naming should contain, I must explain what descriptivist and causal theories lay out. Gottlob Frege used the example of ‘Hesperus’ and ‘Phosphorus’ to explain the idea
…show more content…
Saul Kripke, perhaps, has the most well known challenge of sense and reference of proper names. In his lectures, turned essay, “Naming and Necessity”, Kripke challenges the idea of sense and reference on a few merits. He first states that these descriptivist theories do not properly satisfy what he defines as the all-possible worlds scenario (Kripke 2013, 2). In short, Kripke believes proper names do not have senses that are true in all possible worlds (Kripke 2013, 2). To go back to my Barack Obama example, Kripke would say that it is not a necessary truth that in all possible worlds Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States. This is not Kripke’s only problem with descriptivist theory, however. His other issue is with mistaken reference. An example of this that Kripke uses is that fact that there are many people who believe Christopher Columbus discovered that the earth is not flat. To many in the actual world, the sense ‘the man to discover the earth is not flat’ would refer to Christopher Columbus. The problem with this is that is simply not true. Christopher Columbus did not discover the earth’s curvature, this was likely discovered by “some Greek” as Kripke puts it (Kripke 2013, 7). Here lies a common mistake in reference. The sense is picking out a referent for many, though it is not the right one. There are plenty other examples of mistaken reference in the …show more content…
This problem is with reference changes. Let’s say for instance, two babies are born, and both their Mother's name them. Then, inadvertently, a nurse switches the two babies. “It will henceforth undeniably be the case that the man universally known as ‘Jack’ is so called because a woman dubbed some other baby with the name” (Evans 2013, 6). By this, Evans points out that “Jack” was never dubbed “Jack” after all. “Jack” was dubbed a different name entirely, but is known as “Jack” because of a mistake by the nurse. As Evans states, “it is clear that the causal theory unamended is not adequate” (Evans 2013,
Saul Kripke, perhaps, has the most well known challenge of sense and reference of proper names. In his lectures, turned essay, “Naming and Necessity”, Kripke challenges the idea of sense and reference on a few merits. He first states that these descriptivist theories do not properly satisfy what he defines as the all-possible worlds scenario (Kripke 2013, 2). In short, Kripke believes proper names do not have senses that are true in all possible worlds (Kripke 2013, 2). To go back to my Barack Obama example, Kripke would say that it is not a necessary truth that in all possible worlds Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States. This is not Kripke’s only problem with descriptivist theory, however. His other issue is with mistaken reference. An example of this that Kripke uses is that fact that there are many people who believe Christopher Columbus discovered that the earth is not flat. To many in the actual world, the sense ‘the man to discover the earth is not flat’ would refer to Christopher Columbus. The problem with this is that is simply not true. Christopher Columbus did not discover the earth’s curvature, this was likely discovered by “some Greek” as Kripke puts it (Kripke 2013, 7). Here lies a common mistake in reference. The sense is picking out a referent for many, though it is not the right one. There are plenty other examples of mistaken reference in the …show more content…
This problem is with reference changes. Let’s say for instance, two babies are born, and both their Mother's name them. Then, inadvertently, a nurse switches the two babies. “It will henceforth undeniably be the case that the man universally known as ‘Jack’ is so called because a woman dubbed some other baby with the name” (Evans 2013, 6). By this, Evans points out that “Jack” was never dubbed “Jack” after all. “Jack” was dubbed a different name entirely, but is known as “Jack” because of a mistake by the nurse. As Evans states, “it is clear that the causal theory unamended is not adequate” (Evans 2013,