Ideas from 'Frege's Distinction of Sense and Reference' by Michael Dummett [1975], by Theme Structure

[found in 'Truth and Other Enigmas' by Dummett,Michael [Duckworth 1978,0-7156-1650-1]].

green numbers give full details    |     back to texts     |     unexpand these ideas

---

5. Theory of Logic / F. Referring in Logic / 1. Naming / b. Names as descriptive

9182	Ancient names like 'Obadiah' depend on tradition, not on where the name originated

			Full Idea: In the case of 'Obadiah', associated only with one act of writing a prophecy, ..it is the tradition which connects our use of the name with the man; where the actual name itself first came from has little to do with it.
			From: Michael Dummett (Frege's Distinction of Sense and Reference [1975], p.256)
			A reaction: Excellent. This seems to me a much more accurate account of reference than the notion of a baptism. In the case of 'Homer', whether someone was ever baptised thus is of no importance to us. The tradition is everything. Also Shakespeare.

19. Language / B. Reference / 3. Direct Reference / b. Causal reference

9181	The causal theory of reference can't distinguish just hearing a name from knowing its use

			Full Idea: The causal theory of reference, in a full-blown form, makes it impossible to distinguish between knowing the use of a proper name and simply having heard the name and recognising it as a name.
			From: Michael Dummett (Frege's Distinction of Sense and Reference [1975], p.254)
			A reaction: None of these things are all-or-nothing. I have an inkling of how to use it once I realise it is a name. Of course you could be causally connected to a name and not even realise that it was a name, so something more is needed.