The purpose of this research is to examine the utility of Kripke's causal theory and his new theory of reference (NTR) in regard to its ability to account for logical difficulties inherent in the more traditional theories of naming. The plan of the research will be to set forth summary evaluations of what can be seen to be the limitation of traditional theories, chiefly those of Frege and Russell, in regard to their accounting for aspects of reference, and to discuss ways in which Kripke's theory appears to account for such aspects. Additionally, apparent limitations of Kripke's approach will be discussed in regard to the NTR's ability to interpret certain kinds of expressions.
There are two main features of both traditional theories of logical analysis of proper names and NTR: interpretation of meaning and referring in general and interpretation of statements of existence in particular. Sometimes, such interpretations appear to coincide, and other times, they appear to work at cross purposes. In this regard, we can recall Strawson's criticism, cited in Chapter IV, that in Russell's analysis of a statement such as "the king of France is bald," Russell mixes questions of the reference of an entity with questions of its existence. This point will be developed more fully below.
Various theorists seek to use language in such a way as to make their interpretations incorrigible. From Frege and Russell among the modern "classical" theorists, through Strawson's and Searle's treatments of cluster theory, to Kripke's NTR, competing methods of interpretation all aim at resolving the complexities associated with the relations among the meaning, logic, connotation, and denotation of proper names and statements that involve proper names.
An issue of interpretation that runs through a number of theories is that of the context in which expressions occur. The issue of the ways in which context enters into traditional theories of reference has ...