10 ideas
| 7746 | We don't normally think of names as having senses (e.g. we don't give definitions of them) [Searle] |
| 7747 | How can a proper name be correlated with its object if it hasn't got a sense? [Searle] |
| 7748 | 'Aristotle' means more than just 'an object that was christened "Aristotle"' [Searle] |
| 7749 | Reference for proper names presupposes a set of uniquely referring descriptions [Searle] |
| 7750 | Proper names are logically connected with their characteristics, in a loose way [Searle] |
| 15793 | We can take 'ways things might have been' as irreducible elements in our ontology [Stalnaker, by Lycan] |
| 22692 | A work can be morally and artistically excellent, despite rejecting moral truth [John,E] |
| 22693 | The works we value most are in sympathy with our own moral views [John,E] |
| 22694 | We should understand what is morally important in a story, without having to endorse it [John,E] |
| 22695 | We value morality in art because that is what we care about - but it is a contingent fact [John,E] |