Skip to main content
Log in

Rigid Designators for Properties

  • Published:
Philosophical Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Here I defend the position that some singular terms for properties are rigid designators, responding to Stephen P. Schwartz’s interesting criticisms of that position. First, I argue that my position does not depend on ontological parsimony with respect to properties – e.g., there is no need to claim that there are only natural properties – to get around the problem of “unusual properties.” Second, I argue that my position does not confuse sameness of meaning across possible worlds with sameness of designation, or rigid designation. Third, I argue that my position does not founder by way of failing to assign rigidity the work of grounding a posteriori necessity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • C.J. Bolton (1996) ArticleTitle‘Proper Names, Taxonomic Names and Necessity’ The Philosophical Quarterly 46 145–157

    Google Scholar 

  • K. Donnellan (1973) ArticleTitle‘Substances as Individuals’ Journal of Philosophy 70 711–712 Occurrence Handle10.2307/2025080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • H. Hahn (1959) ‘Logic, Mathematics, and Knowledge of Nature’ A.J. Ayer (Eds) Logical Positivism Free Press New York 147–161

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Heintz (1973) Subjects and Predicables Mouton The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • J. LaPorte (2000) ArticleTitle‘Rigidity and Kind’ Philosophical Studies 97 293–316 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1018360026223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • J. LaPorte (2004) Natural Kinds and Conceptual Change Cambridge University Press New York

    Google Scholar 

  • B. Linsky (1984) ArticleTitle‘General Terms as Designators’ Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 65 259–276

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Kripke (1971) ‘Identity and Necessity’ M.K. Munitz (Eds) Identity and Individuation New York University Press New York 135–164

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Kripke (1979) ‘A Puzzle About Belief’ A. Margalit (Eds) Meaning and Use D. Reidel Dordrecht 239–283

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Kripke (1980) Naming and Necessity Harvard University Press Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam H. (1975). ‘The Meaning of ’Meaning”, in Mind, Language and Reality, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 215–271.

  • N. Salmon (1981) Reference and Essence Princeton University Press Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • N. Salmon (2003) ArticleTitle‘Naming, Necessity, and Beyond’ Mind 112 475–492 Occurrence Handle10.1093/mind/112.447.475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • S.P. Schwartz (2002) ArticleTitle‘Kinds, General Terms, and Rigidity: A Reply to LaPorte’ Philosophical Studies 109 265–277 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1019612524792

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • S. Soames (2002) Beyond Rigidity: The Unfinished Semantic Agenda of Naming and Necessity Oxford University Press New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Swoyer, C. (2000): ‘Properties’, in E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, URL=http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2000/entries/properties/.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph LaPorte.

Additional information

I thank Steve Schwartz and Bernard Linsky for helpful feedback on this paper

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

LaPorte, J. Rigid Designators for Properties. Philos Stud 130, 321–336 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-004-4676-5

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-004-4676-5

Keywords

Navigation