Causal theory of reference: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:18, 20 August 2018

Revision as of 21:19, 20 August 2018

Line 35:

* 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/> (See also [[Structuralism (philosophy of science)#Further criticism|Criticism of structuralism]].)

== CriticismsCriticism 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.{{citation needed|reason=Evans' argument and quote are herein unsourced-no indication of where he argued this|date=April 2016}}

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>{{

harvnb|Sainsbury|2001|p=212}}</ref> The causal chain we associate with the use of proper names may begin merely with a "journalistic" source.<ref>{{

harvnb|Sainsbury|2001|p=165}}</ref>