more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Description theories of reference are supposed to have been well and truly refuted. I think not: ..it is still tenable with my seven points, and part of the truth of reference [7: rigidity, egocentric, tokens, causal, imperfect, indeterminate, families].
Gist of Idea
Descriptive theories remain part of the theory of reference (with seven mild modifications)
Source
David Lewis (Putnam's Paradox [1984], 'Glob Desc')
Book Ref
Lewis,David: 'Papers in Metaphysics and Epistemology' [CUP 1999], p.60
A Reaction
(The bit at the end refers to his seven points, on p.59). He calls his basic proposal 'causal descriptivism', incorporating his seven slight modifications of traditional descriptivism about reference.
| 14209 | Descriptive theories remain part of the theory of reference (with seven mild modifications) [Lewis] |
| 14215 | Causal theories of reference make errors in reference easy [Lewis] |
| 14210 | A gerrymandered mereological sum can be a mess, but still have natural joints [Lewis] |
| 14213 | Anti-realists see the world as imaginary, or lacking joints, or beyond reference, or beyond truth [Lewis] |
| 14212 | A consistent theory just needs one model; isomorphic versions will do too, and large domains provide those [Lewis] |