摘要
对克里普克的模态论证及其相关环节做了详尽的批判性考察,得出如下结论:(1)关于严格性的直观测试行不通,其中存在一个不合法的跳跃:从"一个对象必定自我同一"这个形而上学论断跳到一个语言哲学命题"一个名称是一个对象的严格指示词";(2)关于严格性的精确定义与引出严格指示词的语言直观相冲突;(3)反驳描述论的模态论证不成立:所谓的"严格指示词"可以归结为在模态语境中取宽辖域的非严格的名称;假设真有所谓的"严格指示词"的话,限定摹状词也可以被严格化,我们仍没有理由否认名称是相应摹状词的缩写。(4)克里普克对关于他的模态论证的宽辖域批评所做的回应也是失败的。所有这些结论都依赖于一个隐含前提:名称和摹状词在模态语境中可以取宽辖域或窄辖域,而此前提在本文中得到了论证。
Kripke＇s modal argument and its relevant elements are carefully and critically examined in this paper.The following conclusions are reached：（1） His intuitive tests of rigidity does not work,because they involve at least an improper transition from a metaphysical thesis that any object cannot but have been self-identical to a claim in the philosophy of language that a name is a rigid designator of an object.（2）His precise definition of rigidity is incompatible with his linguistic intuition from which his notion of a rigid designator is derived.（3）His modal argument fails.So called rigid designators can be reduced to non-rigid names with a wide scope in modal contexts.Supposing that there really were rigid designators,definite descriptions could be rigidified to refer to some particular individuals in the actual world,and to refer to the same individuals in all possible worlds.Thus,we still have no reason to deny an interpretation of a name as the abbreviation of such description（s）.（4）His response to the wide-scope critics of his modal argument also fails.All these conclusions depends on an implicit premise that names and definite descriptions can both take wide scope and narrow scope over modalities,which has been argued in this paper.
出处
《晋阳学刊》
CSSCI
2012年第3期70-82,共13页
Academic Journal of Jinyang
基金
教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地(北京大学外国哲学研究所)项目"对克里普克语言哲学的系统性质疑和对一种新理论的建构"的研究成果
项目批准号:11JJD720001
关键词
严格指示词
直观测试
精确定义
模态论证
宽辖域
窄辖域
严格化的摹状词
Rigid designator
Intuitive tests of rigidity
Precise definition of rigidity
Modal argument
Wide scope
Narrow scope
Rigidified description
