Why the new theory of reference does not entail absolute time and space

Philosophy of Science 59 (3):508-509 (1992)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I explain why the New Theory of Reference of Marcus, Kripke, Kaplan, Putnam and others does not entail absolute time and space, contrary to what Quentin Smith has recently claimed

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,069

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

Quentin Smith.A. Reply to Scott Soames - 1998 - In J. H. Fetzer & P. Humphreys (eds.), The New Theory of Reference: Kripke, Marcus, and its Origins. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 37.
Quentin Smith.A. Posteriori - 1998 - In J. H. Fetzer & P. Humphreys (eds.), The New Theory of Reference: Kripke, Marcus, and its Origins. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 270--137.
Quentin Smith.Ruth Barcan Marcus - 1998 - In J. H. Fetzer & P. Humphreys (eds.), The New Theory of Reference: Kripke, Marcus, and its Origins. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 3.
Space and Time: The Ongoing Quest. [REVIEW]Eftichios Bitsakis - 2005 - Foundations of Physics 35 (1):57-83.
Revisionism about Reference: A Reply to Smith.Scott Soames - 1998 - In Paul Humphreys & James Fetzer (eds.), The New Theory of Reference: Kripke, Marcus, and its origins. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 13--35.
Sklar's Maneuver.Bradford Skow - 2007 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 58 (4):777-786.
Language and time.Quentin Smith - 1993 - New York: Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
76 (#223,546)

6 months
17 (#161,514)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robert Rynasiewicz
Johns Hopkins University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Naming and Necessity.Saul Kripke - 1980 - Critica 17 (49):69-71.

Add more references