[Wittrs] Re: Proper Names --Wittgenstein, Russell, Kripke

  • From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 15:43:00 -0800 (PST)

... yes, I remember segments of that discussion. I believe it was over the 
difficulty of the idea you might have had about what a "referent" was. You were 
saying, I think, that N could stand for any persons so named, and Walter was 
emphasizing that N was only standing for one of those persons. Wittgenstein's 
view doesn't dispute what "reference" means in this context. Wittgenstein isn't 
arguing that N stands for anyone so named (the way, e.g., "chair" does). His 
view appears to be premised on the idea that the name and its bearer are not 
identical. And that what a name does (to or about any discreet bearer) is a 
function of what sense the name is playing in the language game. 

One wants to say of words like proper names and of words like "is," the 
language game is TIGHT one. Imagine playing Charades versus the game of 
Operation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_(game). Proper Names is more 
like Operation.  What one is doing to or about the bearer takes place 
within more limited confines.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
Discussion Group: http://seanwilson.org/wittgenstein.discussion.html 




=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. wittrsamr
  3. Archive
  4. 02-2010