[FOM] A question about Church

Francisco Gomes Martins apofantico at gmail.com
Wed Jun 12 21:31:08 EDT 2013

As far as Im concerned with this is the logical order. Bear in mind Church
is in a Fregean setting where the denotation of an expression is a function
of its sense.
You should read Anthony Anderson´s dissertation. Im sure that it will be


2013/6/12 Harry Deutsch <hdeutsch at ilstu.edu>

> In "Intensionality and the paradox of the name relation" (in Themes from
> Kaplan, Oxford, 1989) Church writes:
> "Languages are of course possible within which no two primitive constants
> denote the same thing. For given any primitive constant we may delete from
> language all but one of the class of primitive constants that concurrent
> [co-referential] with it. [The following is italicized by Church] Whether
> it is always effectively possible to cut down the vocabulary of a given
> language so that no pair of concurrent but non-synonymous primitive
> constants remains is an open question.  The difficulty lies in a method by
> which to determine in regard to each pair of primitive constants whether
> they are concurrent."
> I think that the "but non-synonymous" is not necessary to the problem
> Church is posing.  The constants just have to be different.  In any case,
> does anyone know the answer to this "o;pen question?"
> Harry Deutsch
> _______________________________________________
> FOM mailing list
> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
> http://www.cs.nyu.edu/mailman/listinfo/fom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/fom/attachments/20130612/eb9f8d49/attachment.html>

More information about the FOM mailing list