green numbers give full details.     |    back to list of philosophers     |     expand these ideas

Ideas of Kent Bach, by Text

[American, fl. 1985, Professor at San Francisco State University.]

2005 The Emperor's New 'Knows'
I p.56 12900 How could 'S knows he has hands' not have a fixed content?
I p.61 12901 If contextualism is right, knowledge sentences are baffling out of their context
III p.68 12902 Sceptics aren't changing the meaning of 'know', but claiming knowing is tougher than we think
2006 What Does It Take to Refer?
Intro p.517 10439 What refers: indefinite or definite or demonstrative descriptions, names, indexicals, demonstratives?
Intro p.519 10440 An object can be described without being referred to
22.1 p.519 10441 If we can refer to things which change, we can't be obliged to single out their properties
22.1 p.534 10446 Fictional reference is different inside and outside the fiction
22.1 p.534 10447 We can refer to fictional entities if they are abstract objects
22.1 s1 p.522 10442 We can think of an individual without have a uniquely characterizing description
22.1 s2 p.523 10443 You 'allude to', not 'refer to', an individual if you keep their identity vague
22.1 s5 p.526 10444 Definite descriptions can be used to refer, but are not semantically referential
22.1 s7 p.529 10445 It can't be real reference if it could refer to some other thing that satisfies the description
22.2 L1 p.538 10455 Free logic at least allows empty names, but struggles to express non-existence
22.2 L1 p.538 10454 In first-order we can't just assert existence, and it is very hard to deny something's existence
22.2 L1 p.538 10453 In logic constants play the role of proper names
22.2 L1 p.538 10452 Proper names can be non-referential - even predicate as well as attributive uses
22.2 L1 p.538 10456 Millian names struggle with existence, empty names, identities and attitude ascription
22.2 L2 p.542 10457 Since most expressions can be used non-referentially, none of them are inherently referential
22.2 L3 p.543 10458 People slide from contextual variability all the way to contextual determination
22.2 L3 p.544 10459 Context does not create reference; it is just something speakers can exploit
22.2 L3 p.545 10460 'That duck' may not refer to the most obvious one in the group
22.2 L4 p.546 10461 What a pronoun like 'he' refers back to is usually a matter of speaker's intentions
22.2 L4 p.549 10462 Information comes from knowing who is speaking, not just from interpretation of the utterance
22.3 p.551 10463 Just alluding to or describing an object is not the same as referring to it