In this paper, I will assess the merits of the predicative view of proper names. The proponents of the predicate view argue that since their view is able to accommodate these putative referential uses of proper names while still treating them as predicates, their view has the advantage of providing a uniform account of the semantics of proper names. However, the plausibility of the predicate view – and its superiority in its ability to provide a uniform account of proper names – hinged on whether it can successfully accommodate referential uses of proper names. This crucially involves bridging the apparent differences between predicates and proper names. But, as we shall see, in some important respects proper names in their bare occurrences do not behave like the definite descriptions or the complex demonstratives that are thought to embed them. Moreover, definite descriptions, even those involving proper names, do not share an important property of proper names, i.e., that of being always rigid. Lastly, there are problems with the semantics of the name-predicate that also contribute to make the predicate view of proper names unappealing.
Activities > Graduate Research Seminar (GRSem) > Are Proper Names Predicates?
