Causal theory of reference: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Added "where the bearer exists", because the statement about "all possible worlds" is meaningless without it. It is now in accordance with Kripke's definition.
m Criticism of the theory: Unnecessary and distracting addition
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1:
{{Short description|Theory that terms acquire referents via a chain of usage events}}
A '''causal theory of reference''' or '''historical chain theory of reference''' is a theory of how terms acquire specific [[reference|referents]] based on evidence. Such theories have been used to describe many referring terms, particularly logical terms, [[proper names]], and [[natural kind]] terms. In the case of names, for example, a causal theory of reference typically involves the following claims:
 
* a name's [[reference|referent]] is fixed by an original act of naming (also called a "dubbing" or, by [[Saul Kripke]], an "initial baptism"), whereupon the name becomes a [[rigid designator]] of that object.
* later uses of the name succeed in referring to the referent by being linked to that original act via a [[Causality|causal chain]].
 
Weaker versions of the position (perhaps not properly called "causal theories"), claim merely that, in many cases, events in the causal history of a speaker's use of the term, including when the term was first acquired, must be considered to correctly assign references to the speaker's words.
 
Causal theories of names became popular during the 1970s, under the influence of work by Saul Kripke and [[Keith Donnellan]]. Kripke and [[Hilary Putnam]] also defended an analogous causal account of [[natural kind]] terms.
Line 33 ⟶ 34:
Variations of the causal theory include:
* The '''causal-historical theory of reference'''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA--> is the original version of the causal theory. It was put forward by [[Keith Donnellan]] in 1972<ref>Donnellan, Keith. (1972). "Proper Names and Identifying Descriptions." In Donald Davidson; Gilbert Harman (eds.). ''Semantics of Natural Language''. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. pp. 356–379.</ref> and [[Saul Kripke]] in 1980.<ref>Kripke, S. "A Puzzle about Belief", in A. Margalit (ed.), ''Meaning and Use'', Reidel, pp. 239–83 (1979).</ref><ref name=SEP>[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/names/ Names (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)]</ref> This view introduces the idea of reference-passing links in a causal-historical chain.<ref name=SEP/>
* The '''descriptive-causal theory of reference'''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA--> (also '''causal-descriptive theory of reference'''),<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA--><ref name=Psillos279>[[Stathis Psillos]], ''Scientific Realism: How Science Tracks Truth'', Routledge, 1999, p. 279.</ref> a view put forward by [[David Lewis (philosopher)|David Lewis]]<ref name=Psillos279/><ref name=Gattei>Stefano Gattei, ''Thomas Kuhn's 'Linguistic Turn' and the Legacy of Logical Empiricism: Incommensurability, Rationality and the Search for Truth'', Ashgate Publishing, 2012, p. 122.</ref> in 1984,<ref>D. K. Lewis (1984), "Putnam's Paradox." ''Australasian Journal of Philosophy'', '''62'''(3), 221–36; reprinted in D. Lewis (1999), ''Papers on metaphysics and epistemology'', Cambridge University Press, pp. 56–77.</ref> introduces the idea that a minimal descriptive apparatus needs to be added to the causal relations between speaker and object.<ref name=Gattei/> ({{efn|See also [[Structuralism (philosophy of science)#Further criticism|Criticism of structuralism]].)}}
 
== Criticism of the theory ==
[[Gareth Evans (philosopher)|Gareth Evans]] argued that the causal theory, or at least certain common and over-simple variants of it, have the consequence that, however remote or obscure the causal connection between someone's use of a proper name and the object it originally referred to, they still refer to that object when they use the name. (Imagine a name briefly overheard in a train or café.) The theory effectively ignores context and makes reference into a magic trick. Evans describes it as a "[[photograph]]" theory of reference.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Evans|first1=Gareth|last2=Altham|first2=J. E. J.|date=1973|title=The Causal Theory of Names|journal=Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes|volume=47|pages=187–225|issn=0309-7013|jstor=4106912|doi=10.1093/aristoteliansupp/47.1.187}}</ref>
 
The links between different users of the name are particularly obscure. Each user must somehow pass the name on to the next, and must somehow "mean" the right individual as they do so (suppose "Socrates" is the name of a pet [[aardvark]]). Kripke himself notes the difficulty, [[John Searle]] makes much of it.{{Citation needed|reason=Reliable source needed for the whole sentence|date=September 2015}}
 
[[Mark Sainsbury (philosopher)|Mark Sainsbury]] argued<ref>Sainsbury, R.M., ''Departing From Frege: Essays in the Philosophy of Language'', Routledge, 2002, Essay XII.</ref> for a causal theory similar to Kripke's, except that the baptised object is eliminated. A "baptism" may be a baptism of nothing, he argues: a name can be intelligibly introduced even if it names nothing.<ref>{{
Line 52 ⟶ 53:
 
==Notes==
{{notelist}}
 
==Citations==
{{reflist}}
 
== References ==
* [[Gareth Evans (philosopher)|Evans, G.]] (1985). "The Causal Theory of Names". In [[Aloysius Martinich|Martinich, A. P.]], ed. ''The Philosophy of Language''. Oxford University Press, 2012.
* Evans, G. ''The Varieties of Reference'', Oxford 1982.