1. What is what Tashcek calls the 'logical basis for sense'?
2. Look back at Sense and Reference: do you agree that Tascheck's is the right interpretation? (Especially think about the phrase 'cognitive significance' and if thats a problem for Tasheck)
3.What is the Russellian view, and what is the neo-Russellian view? What motivated the departure?
4. What is the cluster view of descriptions? Does it resemble what Devin and Kenny were advocating yesterday? Does it work?
5. How might the neo-Russellian (or Millian) respond to Frege's puzzle about identity? Does it work?
6. Recall the puzzle of ambiguity we discussed last time. (Google this if you don't remember). Is it more of a problem for the Millian or the Fregan or is it equal?
No comments:
Post a Comment