more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Can't I name all the real numbers in the interval (0,1) at once? Couldn't I name them all 'Charley', for example?
Gist of Idea
Could I name all of the real numbers in one fell swoop? Call them all 'Charley'?
Source
Alvin Plantinga (De Re and De Dicto [1969], p.40)
Book Ref
Plantinga,Alvin: 'Essays in the Metaphysics of Modality' [OUP 2003], p.40
A Reaction
Plantinga is nervous about such a sweeping move, but can't think of an objection. This addresses a big problem, I think - that you are supposed to accept the real numbers when we cannot possibly name them all.
| 14642 | Expressing modality about a statement is 'de dicto'; expressing it of property-possession is 'de re' [Plantinga] |
| 14643 | 'De dicto' true and 'de re' false is possible, and so is 'de dicto' false and 'de re' true [Plantinga] |
| 14646 | An object has a property essentially if it couldn't conceivably have lacked it [Plantinga] |
| 14647 | Surely self-identity is essential to Socrates? [Plantinga] |
| 14648 | Could I name all of the real numbers in one fell swoop? Call them all 'Charley'? [Plantinga] |
| 14649 | Can we find an appropriate 'de dicto' paraphrase for any 'de re' proposition? [Plantinga] |
| 14650 | Maybe proper names involve essentialism [Plantinga] |
| 14651 | What Socrates could have been, and could have become, are different? [Plantinga] |