more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
To be necessarily greater than 7 is not a trait of a number, but depends on the manner of referring to the number.
Gist of Idea
To be necessarily greater than 7 is not a trait of 7, but depends on how 7 is referred to
Source
Willard Quine (Reference and Modality [1953], §2)
Book Ref
Plantinga,Alvin: 'Essays in the Metaphysics of Modality' [OUP 2003], p.148
A Reaction
The most concise quotation of Quine's objection to 'de re' modality. The point is whether the number might have been referred to as 'the number of planets'. So many of these problems are solved by fixing unambiguous propositions first.
9201 | Whether 9 is necessarily greater than 7 depends on how '9' is described [Quine, by Fine,K] |
9203 | We can't quantify in modal contexts, because the modality depends on descriptions, not objects [Quine, by Fine,K] |
10925 | Failure of substitutivity shows that a personal name is not purely referential [Quine] |
10926 | Quantifying into referentially opaque contexts often produces nonsense [Quine] |
14645 | To be necessarily greater than 7 is not a trait of 7, but depends on how 7 is referred to [Quine] |
10930 | Quantification into modal contexts requires objects to have an essence [Quine] |
10927 | Necessity only applies to objects if they are distinctively specified [Quine] |
10928 | Maybe we can quantify modally if the objects are intensional, but it seems unlikely [Quine] |
10931 | We can't say 'necessarily if x is in water then x dissolves' if we can't quantify modally [Quine] |