Abstract

I begin the chapter by considering the distinction between modality de re and modality de dicto in the works of Aristotle, St. Thomas Aquinas, G. E. Moore, and Norman Malcolm. I then consider two similar objections to modality de re brought by William Kneale and W. V. Quine. Both of these objections fail because they depend on a de re/de dicto confusion. Moreover, I formulate a general rule for correlating propositions that express modality de re with propositions that express modality de dicto. The formulation I offer relies heavily on proper names and I conclude by suggesting further routes of inquiry into the connection between proper names and essentialism.