more from this thinker
|
more from this text
Single Idea 2342
[filed under theme 26. Natural Theory / B. Natural Kinds / 5. Reference to Natural Kinds
]
Full Idea
"Water" functions as a natural kind term, but "H2O" is a description, synonymous with an account of its atoms.
Gist of Idea
"Water" is a natural kind term, but "H2O" is a description
Source
Hilary Putnam (Representation and Reality [1988], §3 p.50)
Book Ref
Putnam,Hilary: 'Representation and Reality' [MIT 1992], p.50
The
13 ideas
with the same theme
[how language terms refer to natural kinds]:
|
16782
|
The names of all the types of creature were given forever by Adam
[Anon (Tor)]
|
|
11904
|
Express natural kinds as a posteriori predicate connections, not as singular terms
[Putnam, by Mackie,P]
|
|
17507
|
Natural kind stereotypes are 'strong' (obvious, like tiger) or 'weak' (obscure, like molybdenum)
[Putnam]
|
|
2342
|
"Water" is a natural kind term, but "H2O" is a description
[Putnam]
|
|
8873
|
The cause of a usage determines meaning, but why is the microstructure of water relevant?
[Davidson]
|
|
4963
|
The properties that fix reference are contingent, the properties involving meaning are necessary
[Kripke]
|
|
17056
|
Terms for natural kinds are very close to proper names
[Kripke]
|
|
18891
|
Nothing in the direct theory of reference blocks anti-essentialism; water structure might have been different
[Salmon,N]
|
|
15701
|
Nouns seem to invoke stable kinds more than predicates do
[Gelman]
|
|
6764
|
Nominal essence of a natural kind is the features that make it fit its name
[Bird]
|
|
6766
|
Jadeite and nephrite are superficially identical, but have different composition
[Bird]
|
|
6808
|
Reference to scientific terms is by explanatory role, not by descriptions
[Bird]
|
|
13284
|
Should vernacular classifications ever be counted as natural kind terms?
[Koslicki]
|