In the contemporary debate about the nature of persistence, stage theory is the view that ordinary objects (artefacts, animals, persons, etc.) are instantaneous and “persist” by being suitably related to other instantaneous objects. In this paper I focus on the issue of what stage theorists should say about the semantics of ordinary proper names, like ‘Socrates’ or ‘London’. I consider the remarks that stage theorists actually make about this issue, present some problems they face, and finally offer what I take to be the best alternative available for them.
KeywordsStage theory Persistence Perdurantism Counterpart theory Proper names
For their comments and discussion on previous versions of this paper, I would like to thank Gemma Celestino, Manuel García-Carpintero, Dan López de Sa, Genoveva Martí, Fabrice Correia, Timothy Lewis, Chelsey Booth, Gary Wedeking, Steven Savitt, two anonymous referees, and audiences at Barcelona, Valencia, Paris, Vancouver, Calgary, Pasadena, and Buenos Aires. Research leading to this paper has been funded by the research projects CSD2009-00056, FFI2010-15717, and HUM2007-61108 (Spanish Government).