The Invariance of Sense

Journal of Philosophy 103 (3):111-144 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

How many senses can a given name have, with its reference held fixed? One, more than one? One answer that most would agree to is that sense is unique for each utterance of a name, that is, that a name can have no more than one sense on any given occasion. But is sense unique in any stronger sense than this? The answer that is typically attributed to Frege is that there is not, that, as Tyler Burge puts it, 1 Frege “treats proper names as having different senses while applying to the same person.” There are a number of possibilities for the locus of this multiplicity of sense; the following remark by Ruth Marcus indicates the possibilities: “the sense of a term is whatever is grasped or understood by a speaker on a particular occasion of use and may vary from occasion to occasion as well as from speaker to speaker.”2 Of the views canvassed by Marcus, we can draw out a more conservative one, and one more extreme. On the more conservative view, Frege is holding that sense may vary from speaker to speaker; on the more extreme view, Frege holds not only this, but that sense may vary from context to context. Endorsements of the two views are not hard to find. For example, typical sorts of endorsement of the conservative view are found in Harold Noonan’s remark that “different senses [are] associated with the name ‘Aris-.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,829

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Laws, counterfactuals, stability, and degrees of lawhood.Marc Lange - 1999 - Philosophy of Science 66 (2):243-267.
Factorization, Algebraization, and Shape Invariance.A. Inomata & O. Kizilkaya - 1998 - Foundations of Physics 28 (1):107-124.
Explanation and invariance in the special sciences.James Woodward - 2000 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51 (2):197-254.
Two theorems on invariance and causality.Nancy Cartwright - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (1):203-224.
Set-theoretical Invariance Criteria for Logicality.Solomon Feferman - 2010 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 51 (1):3-20.
Logicality and Invariance.Denis Bonnay - 2006 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 14 (1):29-68.
Invariance, Symmetry and Meaning.Patrick Suppes - 2000 - Foundations of Physics 30 (10):1569-1585.
Crisp's ‘ethics without reasons?’: A note on invariance.Edward Harcourt - 2007 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 4 (1):50-54.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
224 (#89,778)

6 months
32 (#103,933)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robert May
University of California, Davis

Citations of this work

Solving Frege's puzzle.Richard Heck - 2012 - Journal of Philosophy 109 (1-2):728-732.
Shared modes of presentation.Simon Prosser - 2018 - Mind and Language 34 (4):465-482.
Tolerating Sense Variation.Eliot Michaelson & Mark Textor - 2023 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 101 (1):182-196.

View all 15 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

A puzzle about belief.Saul A. Kripke - 1979 - In A. Margalit (ed.), Meaning and Use. Reidel. pp. 239--83.
On sense and reference.Gottlob Frege - 2010 - In Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel (eds.), Arguing about language. New York: Routledge. pp. 36--56.
Frege on demonstratives.John Perry - 1977 - Philosophical Review 86 (4):474-497.
Truth.Michael Dummett - 1959 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 59 (1):141-62.
Sinning against Frege.Tyler Burge - 1979 - Philosophical Review 88 (3):398-432.

View all 7 references / Add more references