Argumenty proti nominální deskripční teorii
| Title in English | Arguments Against Nominal Description Theory |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Year of publication | 2005 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | Pro-Fil |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Web | http://profil.muni.cz/01_2005/raclavsky_argumenty_proti_ndt.pdf |
| Field | Philosophy and religion |
| Keywords | Nominal Description Theory; modal argument; rigidity; proper names |
| Description | From Kripke's work one can extract (modal) argument against description theory of proper names based on rigidity of names and nonrigidity of descriptions. I show its application against nominal description theory (NDT). Than I explore B. Loar's and K. Bach's objections against (Loar's formulation of) Kripke's argument but in all interpretations these objections do not seem valuable (thus this valid and sound argument is not refutable). I modify this argument into an argument for NDT but discussed variants are formally valid but not sound (their conclusion cannot be accepted as true knowledge). Finally I show many variants of argument against NDT that was transformed from illusory argument for NDT and show their validness and soundness; hence the conclusion 'N' does not mean the same as 'the only bearer of 'N'' can be accepted as true knowledge. |