Keyboard Shortcuts?

×
  • Next step
  • Previous step
  • Skip this slide
  • Previous slide
  • mShow slide thumbnails
  • nShow notes
  • hShow handout latex source
  • NShow talk notes latex source

Click here and press the right key for the next slide (or swipe left)

also ...

Press the left key to go backwards (or swipe right)

Press n to toggle whether notes are shown (or add '?notes' to the url before the #)

Press m or double tap to slide thumbnails (menu)

Press ? at any time to show the keyboard shortcuts

 

Acquaintance and Knowledge of Reference

Previously (lecture 03)

Russell’s idea:

Reference requires acquaintance.

Discussion of knowledge of reference is supposed to help us answer the question I left at the end of the previous unit (on Acquaintance) ....

Q: Does reference require
acquaintance with the referent?

Now (a moment ago)

Reference requires knowledge of reference.

 

When the utterance of a word refers to a thing,
must the utterer have knowledge of reference?

If we think there is knowledge of reference, then we might equate acquaintance with knowledge of reference and so give a positive answer.
If we give a negative answer but also hold that there is knowledge of reference, then we have to give an alternative account of knowledge of reference.
If we deny that there is knowledge of reference, then we should probably give a negative answer to this question.
[This is a possible project for an essay]

What is knowledge of reference?

First idea: Knowledge of reference is acquaintance.

I.e. you have knowledge of reference concerning the utterance of a word when you are acquainted with its referent.

Objection: you might be acquainted with the referent while unaware of any connection between it and the utterance.

Second idea: Knowledge of reference is causation by acquaintance.

I.e. you have knowledge of reference concerning the utterance of a word when your use of that word on this occasion is appropriately caused by your acquaintance with an object.

Twist: The utterance refers to the object in virtue of it being your acquiantance with this object appropriately causing your use of it.

Previously (lecture 03)

Russell’s idea:

Reference requires acquaintance.

Discussion of knowledge of reference is supposed to help us answer the question I left at the end of the previous unit (on Acquaintance) ....

Q: Does reference require
acquaintance with the referent?

Now (a moment ago)

Reference requires knowledge of reference.

 

When the utterance of a word refers to a thing,
must the utterer have knowledge of reference?