Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Logical proper name: e.g. this, that. According to B. Russell's earlier theory, they are the only real names. Logical proper names are not the same as demonstratives. See also acquaintance ,demonstratives._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
E. Tugendhat on Logical Proper Names - Dictionary of Arguments
I 381 "This"/logical proper names/TugendhatVsRussell: "this" (which of all) will not help us in the specification of objects. It serves no function and could therefore stay away. Specification/Tugendhat: no relation! - It takes place against the background of all objects. - This works with singular terms, but not with logical proper names. >Individuation, >Identification, >Individuals, >Demonstratives, >Index words, >Indexicality, cf. >Acquaintance._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Tu I E. Tugendhat Vorlesungen zur Einführung in die Sprachanalytische Philosophie Frankfurt 1976 Tu II E. Tugendhat Philosophische Aufsätze Frankfurt 1992 |
||
> Counter arguments against Tugendhat
> Counter arguments in relation to Logical Proper Names
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-28