rigid designator


Also found in: Wikipedia.

rigid designator

n
(Logic) logic an expression that identifies the same individual in every possible world: for example, "Shakespeare" is a rigid designator since it is possible that Shakespeare might not have been a playwright but not that he might not have been Shakespeare
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014
References in periodicals archive ?
But it's full of (lowercased) usages such as rigid designator, a priori necessary identity, a posteriori contingently true.
that Aristotle is a rigid designator is to say that it denotes the same
Cook, Monte, 1980, "If 'Cat' is a Rigid Designator, What Does it Designate?", Philosophical Studies, vol.
The division into essential and contingent properties enables him to introduce the concept of rigid designator. He defines rigid designators as expressions pointing out the same objects or the same kinds of objects in every possible world.
In Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, he provides a very elaborate explanation about his conceptualization of least advantaged people, stating, "the term 'the least advantaged' is not a rigid designator" (2001, p.
This predicts that a complex demonstrative will not behave like a rigid designator in modal evaluation, when the speaker has only a descriptive intention.
Butler explains this closure in her critique of Zizek's appropriation of Kripke's notion of the "rigid designator." (9) Not content with what he views as the excess of deconstruction, Zizek argues that the name, which he acknowledges is a site of contestation in what he calls "phantasmic investment," wants to avoid the problem of dissolving identity "into a network of non-substantial, differential relations." (10) To this end, he argues with Kripke, whose idea of the rigid designator enables a fixing of reference.
This had caused the value of the sign to become contingent upon other denominations, rupturing its "natural" relationship with a "given" origin performing as rigid designator. In this scenario any resemblance between outward signs and inner forms could not be treated as unquestionably authentic.
to be possible?"[16] Kripke does not explicitly address the problem, but the answer to this question, it appears, takes the following form: (i) language succeeds in referring; (ii) it does so by means of names, which are rigid designators; (iii) a rigid designator, in order to refer, must always refer to a stable referent; hence (iv) there must be things that exist independently of language and that, in turn, validate its use; and (v) these things must have properties that make them what they are.
In response to this problem I distinguished between two types of rigid designator. I entitled those belonging to one type restrictedly rigid designators (RR designators for short).
This point is sometimes blurred by defining "a rigid designator" (within a Kripkean conception of possible worlds) as one that refers to the same object in every possible world in which this object exists.
Kripke cannot specify, not even sketch, what kind of non-rigid designator D1 is associated with a rigid designator [R.sub.1], in the way required by the paradigm (the second stage in SE), when [R.sub.1] is an ordinary proper name.