Abstract
Cumming (2008) uses a puzzle about belief ascription to argue against a Millian semantics for names, and in favor of a view on which names are assigned denotations relative to a shiftable variable assignment. I want to take the puzzle Cumming raises as an opportunity to showcase the virtues of a rival, broadly Stalnakerian, framework for attitude reports that safeguards Millianism. I begin by describing the puzzle, and arguing that Cumming’s proposed resolution fails. A lesson of this discussion is that the puzzle shouldn’t be addressed by appeal to shiftable parameters of an index. As such, the puzzle seems to militate in favor of a Millian view, not against it. After arguing for this claim, I defend three theses needed to apply a Stalnakerian apparatus to the case, arguing that it not only accounts for the data, but harmoniously integrates the puzzling reports into a general framework for dealing with all de re intensional constructions.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
