Blum’s Puzzle and the Analiticity of Kripkean Identity Statements
- 16 Downloads
We rely on a recent puzzle by Alex Blum to offer a new argument for the old Fitch’s thesis that what we learn a posteriori in Kripkean identity statements like ‘Tully is Cicero’ is contingent and what is not contingent in such statements is analytical, hence hardly a posteriori.
KeywordsIdentity statements Rigid designators Direct designators A posteriori de re Modal axiom schema (K)
I wish to thank Alex Blum for his comments on an earlier version of this paper.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
- Kripke, S. (1971). Identity and necessity. In M. Munitz, (Ed.), Identity and individuation (pp. 135–164). New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
- Kripke, S. (1980). Naming and necessity. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Salmon, N. (1986). Frege’s puzzle., Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press.Google Scholar