|
|
Paul Holbach wrote:
> > Owen wrote:
> > > Roberto Vescarelli wrote:
>
> > > (a) there are in common language such words like 'Father Christmas' used
> > > to
> > > denote non-existing objects
>
> > I don't agree that 'Santa Clause' or 'Father Christmas' denote
> > anything at all.
> > They are referred to only by the predicates that describe them. They
> > have no objectual reference.
>
> There are two competing theories of reference, both of which are
> coherently defensible:
>
> (1) If a does not exist, then "a" refers to nothing (i.e. then "a" is
> irreferential).
>
> (2) If a does not exist, then "a" refers to something, but to something
> nonexistent.
>
> #PH
> (2) If a does not exist, then "a" refers to something, but to something
> nonexistent.
What kind of things are 'nonexistent'?
Why do you assume that nonexistent things exist?
|
|