Kripke's Causal Theory

An issue of interpretation that runs through and through a number of theories is that of the context in which expressions occur. The issue of the slipway in which context enters into traditional theories of telephone extension has been noted by a number of commentators, although context is interpreted in a variety of ways. Typically, however, the issue of context appears to be noted as part of arguments that have a different analytical emphasis. In the process of sorting out reasons that Kripke's NTR appears to be superior to early(a) theories in its ability to interpret meaning, Kripke's own approach to context, which is committed to much(prenominal)(prenominal) concepts of his as the causal theory and starchy designators, emerges as a feature of compend of his work, as well as of critique of competing theories.

It has been noted in earlier chapters that Frege accounts for the reference or meaning of a proper conjure in terms of the sense in which it is expressed and that for Frege, interpretation of a get up or more ex telephone numberly an identity statement that includes a name for the object that the name designates must be derived rigorously from its sense. When Frege says that the "sense of a proper name is grasped by everybody who is sufficiently familiar with the

In discussing Wittgenstein's analysis of the statement "Moses did not exist" as problematic with escort to the name "Moses" having a "fixed and unequivocal use," Kripke says that he prefers in general the cluster view of the referent of "Moses" to the analyses of Frege or Russell. In this regard, he appears to deplore, with Strawson, the markulaic language, particularly of Russell, that is used for logical analysis. Elsewhere, he cites the analytical "problem of singular attributions of existence":

This analysis of reference fixing as a social/cultural act of communication explains why socially shared conceptions of the universe set up change and evoke be understood to have changed, respecting everything from the break of the day star and evening star to the Newtonian versus Einsteinian universe.

It appears from this that for Kripke, such matters as what a name is at a inclined time are beside the point except insofar as the name is socially and interpretatively instrumental as a rigid designator of an object. What this approach does is provide a method of interpretation that allows genuine identity statements to be informative, or that guarantees that new information closely either names as such or denoting phrases of the name, can be absorbed by the social context in a way that interprets the meaning (fixes a reference), perhaps of the name or description as such, but certainly of the modal auxiliary verb context, or the truth conditions, under which a statement is made.

Russell's method of logical analysis in his theory of descriptions develops in the form of a protracted response to the commonsense or courtly idea that denoting phrases can be promptly interpreted. Because they cannot be readily interpreted they must be logically interpreted; they do not have any meaning in themselves. The problem of appropriate interpretation, for Russell, is the form that the conventional phrases take. He discusses why such phrases are logically ambiguous or "difficult," as he frequently says in "On
Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!