|
|
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{Blacklisted-links|1=
| | Hello. Allow me introduce the author. Her title is Emilia Shroyer but it's not the most feminine title out there. What I love performing is taking part in baseball but I haven't produced a dime with it. For many years he's been residing in North Dakota and his family members enjoys it. Managing individuals has been his working day job for a while.<br><br>My blog post; [http://miu.tw/dietmealdelivery74619 weight loss food delivery] |
| *http://fivebooks.com/interviews/scott-soames-on-philosophy-language
| |
| *:''Triggered by <code>\bfivebooks\.com\b</code> on the local blacklist''|bot=Cyberbot II}}
| |
| {{BLP sources|date=April 2009}}
| |
| {{Infobox philosopher
| |
| |region = [[Western Philosophy]]
| |
| |era = [[Contemporary philosophy]]
| |
| | image = Kripke.JPG
| |
| | image_size = 200px
| |
| | caption =
| |
| |name = Saul Kripke
| |
| |birth_date = {{Birth date and age|mf=yes|1940|11|13}}
| |
| |birth_place = [[Bay Shore, New York]]
| |
| |death_date =
| |
| |school_tradition = [[Analytic philosophy|Analytic]]
| |
| |main_interests = [[Logic]] <small>(particularly [[Modal logic|modal]])</small><br />[[Philosophy of language]]<br />[[Metaphysics]]<br />[[Set theory]]<br />[[Epistemology]]<br />[[Philosophy of mind]]<br />History of analytic philosophy
| |
| |notable_ideas = [[Kripke–Platek set theory]]<br/>[[Causal theory of reference]]<br />[[Kripkenstein]]<br />[[Admissible ordinal]]<br />[[Kripke structure]]<br />[[Rigid designator]]<br />[[Kripke semantics]]
| |
| |influences = [[David Hume]]{{·}}[[Gottlob Frege|Frege]]{{·}}[[Haskell Curry|Curry]]{{·}}[[C.I. Lewis|Lewis]]{{·}}[[Bertrand Russell|Russell]]{{·}}[[Alfred Tarski|Tarski]]{{·}}[[Ludwig Wittgenstein|Wittgenstein]]{{·}}[[Michael Dummett|Dummett]]{{·}}[[WVO Quine|Quine]]{{·}}[[Alan Turing|Turing]]
| |
| |influenced = [[John P. Burgess|Burgess]]{{·}}[[Paul Boghossian|Boghossian]]{{·}}[[Tyler Burge|Burge]]{{·}}[[David Chalmers|Chalmers]]{{·}}[[Michael Devitt|Devitt]]{{·}}[[Gareth Evans (philosopher)|Evans]]{{·}}[[Hartry Field|Field]]{{·}}[[David Kaplan (philosopher)|Kaplan]]{{·}}[[Hilary Putnam|Putnam]]{{·}}[[Nathan Salmon|Salmon]]{{·}}[[Sidney Shoemaker|Shoemaker]]{{·}}[[Scott Soames|Soames]]{{·}}[[Scott Weinstein|Weinstein]]{{·}}[[Stephen Yablo|Yablo]]
| |
| }}
| |
| | |
| '''Saul Aaron Kripke''' ({{IPAc-en|s|ɔː|l|_|ˈ|k|r|ɪ|p|k|i}}; born November 13, 1940) is an [[American philosopher]] and [[logician]]. He is currently McCosh Professor of Philosophy, [[Emeritus]], at [[Princeton University]] and teaches as a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the [[CUNY Graduate Center]]. Since the 1960s Kripke has been a central figure in a number of fields related to [[mathematical logic]], [[philosophy of language]], [[philosophy of mathematics]], [[metaphysics]], [[epistemology]], and [[set theory]]. Much of his work remains unpublished or exists only as tape-recordings and privately circulated manuscripts. Kripke was the recipient of the 2001 [[Schock Prize]] in Logic and Philosophy. A recent poll conducted among philosophers ranked Kripke among the top ten most important philosophers of the past 200 years.<ref>[[Brian Leiter]], Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog, [http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2009/03/so-who-is-the-most-important-philosopher-of-the-past-200-years.html "So who *is* the most important philosopher of the past 200 years?"]</ref>
| |
| | |
| Kripke has made influential and original contributions to logic, especially [[modal logic]]. His work has profoundly influenced [[analytic philosophy]], with his principal contribution being a semantics for modal logic, involving [[possible world]]s as described in a system now called [[Kripke semantics]].<ref>Jerry Fodor, "[http://www.lrb.co.uk/v26/n20/jerry-fodor/waters-water-everywhere Water's water everywhere]", ''London Review of Books'', 21 October 2004</ref> Another of his most important contributions is his argument that necessity is a 'metaphysical' notion, which should be separated from the epistemic notion of ''[[a priori and a posteriori|a priori]]'', and that there are [[Logical truth|necessary truths]] which are ''[[Empirical evidence|a posteriori]]'' truths, such as "Water is H<sub>2</sub>O." He has also contributed an original reading of [[Ludwig Wittgenstein|Wittgenstein]], referred to as "[[Kripkenstein]]." His most famous work is ''[[Naming and Necessity]]'' (1980).
| |
| | |
| ==Biography==
| |
| Saul Kripke is the oldest of three children born to [[Dorothy K. Kripke]] and [[Rabbi]] Myer S. Kripke.<ref>{{cite book|last=Kripke|first=Saul|title=Philosophical Troubles: Collected Papers Volume 1|year=2011|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-973015-5|pages=xii}}</ref> His father was the leader of Beth El Synagogue, the only Conservative congregation in [[Omaha]], [[Nebraska]], while his mother wrote educational Jewish books for children. Saul and his two sisters, Madeline and Netta, attended Dundee Grade School and [[Omaha Central High School]]. Kripke was labelled a [[Child prodigy|prodigy]], having taught himself [[Ancient Hebrew]] by the age of six, read the complete works of Shakespeare by nine, and mastered the works of Descartes and complex mathematical problems before finishing elementary school.<ref name="Charles McGrath">{{cite news
| |
| | url = http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/28/books/28krip.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5088&en=9b8c06355a8dc486&ex=1296104400&adxnnl=0&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1156068875-xI9kVaL9WqHJhRK5STWHrw
| |
| | title = Philosopher, 65, Lectures Not About 'What Am I?' but 'What Is I?'
| |
| | author = Charles McGrath
| |
| | work = [[The New York Times]]
| |
| | date = 2006-01-28
| |
| | accessdate = 2008-01-23
| |
| }}</ref><ref>''A Companion to Analytic Philosophy (Blackwell Companions to Philosophy)'', by A. P. Martinich (Editor), E. David Sosa (Editor), 38. Saul Kripke (1940–)</ref> He wrote his first completeness theorem in [[modal logic]] at the age of 17, and had it published a year later. After graduating from high school in 1958, Kripke attended [[Harvard University]] and graduated [[summa cum laude]] obtaining a bachelor's degree in mathematics. During his [[wiktionary:sophomore|sophomore]] year at [[Harvard]], Kripke taught a graduate-level logic course at nearby [[MIT]]. Upon graduation (1962) he received a [[Fulbright Fellowship]], and in 1963 was appointed to the [[Society of Fellows]].
| |
| | |
| After teaching briefly at [[Harvard]], he moved to [[Rockefeller University]] in New York City in 1967, and then received a full-time position at [[Princeton University]] in 1977. In 1988 he received the university's Behrman Award for distinguished achievement in the humanities. In 2002 Kripke began teaching at the [[CUNY Graduate Center]] in midtown Manhattan, and was appointed a distinguished professor of philosophy there in 2003. He was married to philosopher [[Margaret Gilbert]].
| |
| | |
| He has received honorary degrees from the [[University of Nebraska]], Omaha (1977), [[Johns Hopkins University]] (1997), [[University of Haifa]], Israel (1998), and the [[University of Pennsylvania]] (2005). He is a member of the [[American Philosophical Society]], an elected Fellow of the [[American Academy of Arts and Sciences]] and a Corresponding Fellow of the [[British Academy]]. He won the [[Rolf Schock Prizes|Schock Prize]] in Logic and Philosophy in 2001.
| |
| | |
| He is the second cousin once removed of the notable television writer, director, and producer [[Eric Kripke]].
| |
| | |
| ==Saul Kripke Center==
| |
| | |
| The Saul Kripke Center at the [[Graduate Center of the City University of New York]] is dedicated to preserving and promoting Kripke's work. The Saul Kripke Center is directed by Gary Ostertag. The SKC hold events related to Kripke's work and is currently working to create a digital archive of Kripke's previously unpublished recordings of lectures, lecture notes, and correspondence dating back to the 1950s.<ref>http://kripkecenter.commons.gc.cuny.edu/</ref> In his favorable review of Kripke's Philosophical Troubles, [[Mark Crimmins]], a philosopher at [[Stanford]] wrote “That four of the most admired and discussed essays in 1970s philosophy are here is enough to make this first volume of Saul Kripke’s collected articles a must-have…The reader’s delight will grow as hints are dropped that there is a great deal more to come in this series being prepared by Kripke and an ace team of philosopher-editors at the Saul Kripke Center at The Graduate Center of the City University of New York.”<ref>http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/43850-philosophical-troubles-collected-papers-volume-1/</ref>
| |
| | |
| ==Work==
| |
| [[File:LTL model.png|thumb|185px|right|Kripke models for modal logic systems]]
| |
| Kripke's contributions to philosophy include:
| |
| | |
| # [[Kripke semantics]] for [[modal logic|modal and related logics]], published in several essays beginning while he was still in his teens.
| |
| # His 1970 Princeton lectures ''[[Naming and Necessity]]'' (published in 1972 and 1980), that significantly restructured [[philosophy of language]].
| |
| # His interpretation of [[Wittgenstein]].
| |
| # His theory of [[truth]].
| |
| | |
| He has also contributed to set-theory (see [[admissible ordinal]] and [[Kripke-Platek set theory]])
| |
| | |
| ==Modal logic==
| |
| Two of Kripke's earlier works, ''A Completeness Theorem in Modal Logic'' and ''Semantical Considerations on Modal Logic,'' the former written while he was still a teenager, were on the subject of [[modal logic]]. The most familiar logics in the modal family are constructed from a weak logic called K, named after Kripke for his contributions to modal logic. Kripke introduced the now-standard [[Kripke semantics]] (also known as relational semantics or frame semantics) for modal logics. Kripke semantics is a formal semantics for non-classical logic systems. It was first made for modal logics, and later adapted to [[intuitionistic logic]] and other non-classical systems. The discovery of Kripke semantics was a breakthrough in the making of non-classical logics, because the model theory of such logics was absent prior to Kripke.
| |
| | |
| A '''Kripke frame''' or '''modal frame''' is a pair <math>\langle W,R\rangle</math>, where ''W'' is a non-empty set, and ''R'' is a [[binary relation]] on ''W''. Elements of ''W'' are called ''nodes'' or ''worlds'', and ''R'' is known as the [[accessibility relation]]. Depending on the properties of the accessibility relation ([[Transitive relation|transitivity]], reflexivity, etc.), the corresponding frame is described, by extension, as being transitive, reflexive, etc.
| |
| | |
| A '''Kripke model''' is a triple <math>\langle W,R,\Vdash\rangle</math>, where <math>\langle W,R\rangle</math> is a Kripke frame, and <math>\Vdash</math> is a relation between nodes of ''W'' and modal formulas, such that:
| |
| | |
| * <math>w\Vdash\neg A</math> if and only if <math>w\nVdash A</math>,
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash A\to B</math> if and only if <math>w\nVdash A</math> or <math>w\Vdash B</math>,
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash\Box A</math> if and only if <math>\forall u\,(w\; R\; u \to u\Vdash A)</math>.
| |
| | |
| We read <math>w\Vdash A</math> as "''w'' satisfies ''A''", "''A'' is satisfied in ''w''", or "''w'' forces ''A''". The relation <math>\Vdash</math> is called the ''satisfaction relation'', ''evaluation'', or ''[[Forcing (mathematics)|forcing]] relation''. The satisfaction relation is uniquely determined by its value on propositional variables.
| |
| | |
| A formula ''A'' is '''valid''' in:
| |
| | |
| * a model <math>\langle W,R,\Vdash\rangle</math>, if <math>w\Vdash A</math> for all ''w'' ∈ ''W'',
| |
| * a frame <math>\langle W,R\rangle</math>, if it is valid in <math>\langle W,R,\Vdash\rangle</math> for all possible choices of <math>\Vdash</math>,
| |
| * a class ''C'' of frames or models, if it is valid in every member of ''C''.
| |
| | |
| We define Thm(''C'') to be the set of all formulas that are valid in ''C''. Conversely, if ''X'' is a set of formulas, let Mod(''X'') be the class of all frames which validate every formula from ''X''.
| |
| | |
| A modal logic (i.e., a set of formulas) ''L'' is '''sound''' with respect to a class of frames ''C'', if ''L'' ⊆ Thm(''C''). ''L'' is '''complete''' with respect to ''C'' if ''L'' ⊇ Thm(''C'').
| |
| | |
| Semantics is useful for investigating a logic (i.e. a derivation system) only if the semantical [[entailment]] relation reflects its syntactical counterpart, the ''consequence'' relation (''derivability''). It is vital to know which modal logics are sound and complete with respect to a class of Kripke frames, and for them, to determine which class it is.
| |
| | |
| For any class ''C'' of Kripke frames, Thm(''C'') is a [[normal modal logic]] (in particular, theorems of the minimal normal modal logic, ''K'', are valid in every Kripke model). However, the converse does not hold generally. There are Kripke incomplete normal modal logics, which is unproblematic, because most of the modal systems studied are complete of classes of frames described by simple conditions.
| |
| | |
| A normal modal logic ''L'' '''corresponds''' to a class of frames ''C'', if ''C'' = Mod(''L''). In other words, ''C'' is the largest class of frames such that ''L'' is sound wrt ''C''. It follows that ''L'' is Kripke complete if and only if it is complete of its corresponding class.
| |
| | |
| Consider the schema '''T''' : <math>\Box A\to A</math>. '''T''' is valid in any [[reflexive relation|reflexive]] frame <math>\langle W,R\rangle</math>: if <math>w\Vdash \Box A</math>, then <math>w\Vdash A</math> since ''w'' ''R'' ''w''. On the other hand, a frame which validates '''T''' has to be reflexive: fix ''w'' ∈ ''W'', and define satisfaction of a propositional variable ''p'' as follows: <math>u\Vdash p</math> if and only if ''w'' ''R'' ''u''. Then <math>w\Vdash \Box p</math>, thus <math>w\Vdash p</math> by '''T''', which means ''w'' ''R'' ''w'' using the definition of <math>\Vdash</math>. '''T''' corresponds to the class of reflexive Kripke frames.
| |
| | |
| It is often much easier to characterize the corresponding class of ''L'' than to prove its completeness, thus correspondence serves as a guide to completeness proofs. Correspondence is also used to show ''incompleteness'' of modal logics: suppose ''L''<sub>1</sub> ⊆ ''L''<sub>2</sub> are normal modal logics that correspond to the same class of frames, but ''L''<sub>1</sub> does not prove all theorems of ''L''<sub>2</sub>. Then ''L''<sub>1</sub> is Kripke incomplete. For example, the schema <math>\Box(A\equiv\Box A)\to\Box A</math> generates an incomplete logic, as it corresponds to the same class of frames as '''GL''' (viz. transitive and converse well-founded frames), but does not prove the '''GL'''-[[Tautology (logic)|tautology]] <math>\Box
| |
| A\to\Box\Box A</math>.
| |
| | |
| For any normal modal logic ''L'', a Kripke model (called the '''canonical model''') can be constructed, which validates precisely the theorems of ''L'', by an adaptation of the standard technique of using [[maximal consistent set]]s as models. Canonical Kripke models play a role similar to the [[Lindenbaum–Tarski algebra]] construction in algebraic semantics.
| |
| | |
| A set of formulas is ''L''-''consistent'' if no contradiction can be derived from them using the axioms of ''L'', and [[Modus Ponens]]. A ''maximal L-consistent set'' (an ''L''-''MCS'' for short) is an ''L''-consistent set which has no proper ''L''-consistent superset.
| |
| | |
| The '''canonical model''' of ''L'' is a Kripke model <math>\langle W,R,\Vdash\rangle</math>, where ''W'' is the set of all ''L''-''MCS'', and the relations ''R'' and <math>\Vdash</math> are as follows:
| |
| | |
| : <math>X\;R\;Y</math> if and only if for every formula <math>A</math>, if <math>\Box A\in X</math> then <math>A\in Y</math>,
| |
| : <math>X\Vdash A</math> if and only if <math>A\in X</math>.
| |
| | |
| The canonical model is a model of ''L'', as every ''L''-''MCS'' contains all theorems of ''L''. By [[Zorn's lemma]], each ''L''-consistent set is contained in an ''L''-''MCS'', in particular every formula unprovable in ''L'' has a counterexample in the canonical model.
| |
| | |
| The main application of canonical models are completeness proofs. Properties of the canonical model of '''K''' immediately imply completeness of '''K''' with respect to the class of all Kripke frames. This argument does ''not'' work for arbitrary ''L'', because there is no guarantee that the underlying ''frame'' of the canonical model satisfies the frame conditions of ''L''.
| |
| | |
| We say that a formula or a set ''X'' of formulas is '''canonical''' with respect to a property ''P'' of Kripke frames, if
| |
| | |
| * ''X'' is valid in every frame which satisfies ''P'',
| |
| * for any normal modal logic ''L'' which contains ''X'', the underlying frame of the canonical model of ''L'' satisfies ''P''.
| |
| | |
| A union of canonical sets of formulas is itself canonical. It follows from the preceding discussion that any logic axiomatized by
| |
| a canonical set of formulas is Kripke complete, and [[compactness theorem|compact]].
| |
| | |
| The axioms T, 4, D, B, 5, H, G (and thus any combination of them) are canonical. GL and Grz are not canonical, because they are not compact. The axiom M by itself is not canonical (Goldblatt, 1991), but the combined logic '''S4.1''' (in fact, even '''K4.1''') is canonical.
| |
| | |
| In general, it is [[decision problem|undecidable]] whether a given axiom is canonical. We know a nice sufficient condition: H.
| |
| Sahlqvist identified a broad class of formulas (now called [[Sahlqvist formula]]s) such that:
| |
| | |
| * a Sahlqvist formula is canonical,
| |
| * the class of frames corresponding to a Sahlqvist formula is [[first-order logic|first-order]] definable,
| |
| * there is an algorithm which computes the corresponding frame condition to a given Sahlqvist formula.
| |
| | |
| This is a powerful criterion: for example, all axioms listed above as canonical are (equivalent to) Sahlqvist formulas. A logic has the [[finite model property]] (FMP) if it is complete with respect to a class of finite frames. An application of this notion is the decidability question: it follows from Post's theorem that a recursively axiomatized modal logic L which has FMP is decidable, provided it is decidable whether a given finite frame is a model of L. In particular, every finitely axiomatizable logic with FMP is decidable.
| |
| | |
| There are various methods for establishing FMP for a given logic. Refinements and extensions of the canonical model construction often work, using tools such as filtration or unravelling. As another possibility, completeness proofs based on cut-free sequent calculi usually produce finite models directly.
| |
| | |
| Most of the modal systems used in practice (including all listed above) have FMP.
| |
| | |
| In some cases, we can use FMP to prove Kripke completeness of a logic: every normal modal logic is complete wrt a class of modal algebras, and a finite modal algebra can be transformed into a Kripke frame. As an example, Robert Bull proved using this method that every normal extension of S4.3 has FMP, and is Kripke complete.
| |
| | |
| Kripke semantics has a straightforward generalization to logics with more than one modality. A Kripke frame for a language with
| |
| <math>\{\Box_i\mid\,i\in I\}</math> as the set of its necessity operators consists of a non-empty set ''W'' equipped with binary relations ''R<sub>i</sub>'' for each ''i'' ∈ ''I''. The definition of a satisfaction relation is modified as follows:
| |
| | |
| : <math>w\Vdash\Box_i A</math> if and only if <math>\forall u\,(w\;R_i\;u\Rightarrow u\Vdash A).</math>
| |
| | |
| A simplified semantics, discovered by Tim Carlson, is often used for polymodal [[provability logic]]s. A '''Carlson model''' is a structure <math>\langle W,R,\{D_i\}_{i\in I},\Vdash\rangle</math> with a single accessibility relation ''R'', and subsets ''D<sub>i</sub>'' ⊆ ''W'' for each modality. Satisfaction is defined as:
| |
| | |
| : <math>w\Vdash\Box_i A</math> if and only if <math>\forall u\in D_i\,(w\;R\;u\Rightarrow u\Vdash A).</math>
| |
| | |
| Carlson models are easier to visualize and to work with than usual polymodal Kripke models; there are, however, Kripke complete polymodal logics which are Carlson incomplete.
| |
| | |
| In "Semantical Considerations on Modal Logic", published in 1963, Kripke responded to a difficulty with classical [[quantification theory]]. The motivation for the world-relative approach was to represent the possibility that objects in one world may fail to exist in another. If standard quantifier rules are used, however, every term must refer to something that exists in all the possible worlds. This seems incompatible with our ordinary practice of using terms to refer to things that exist contingently.
| |
| | |
| Kripke's response to this difficulty was to eliminate terms. He gave an example of a system that uses the world-relative interpretation and preserves the classical rules. However, the costs are severe. First, his language is artificially impoverished, and second, the rules for the propositional modal logic must be weakened.
| |
| | |
| Kripke's possible worlds theory has been used by narratologists (beginning with Pavel and Dolezel) to understand "reader's manipulation of alternative plot developments, or the characters' planned or fantasized alternative action series." This application has become especially useful in the analysis of [[hyperfiction]].<ref>Fludernik, Monika. "Histories of Narrative Theory: From Structuralism to Present." ''A Companion to Narrative Theory.'' Ed. Phelan and Rabinowitz. Blackwell Publishing, MA:2005.</ref>
| |
| | |
| ==Intuitionistic logic==
| |
| Kripke semantics for the [[intuitionistic logic]] follows the same
| |
| principles as the semantics of modal logic, but uses a different
| |
| definition of satisfaction.
| |
| | |
| An '''intuitionistic Kripke model''' is a triple
| |
| <math>\langle W,\le,\Vdash\rangle</math>, where <math>\langle W,\le\rangle</math> is a [[partially ordered set|partially ordered]] Kripke frame, and <math>\Vdash</math> satisfies the following conditions:
| |
| * if ''p'' is a propositional variable, <math>w\le u</math>, and <math>w\Vdash p</math>, then <math>u\Vdash p</math> (''persistency'' condition),
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash A\land B</math> if and only if <math>w\Vdash A</math> and <math>w\Vdash B</math>,
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash A\lor B</math> if and only if <math>w\Vdash A</math> or <math>w\Vdash B</math>,
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash A\to B</math> if and only if for all <math>u\ge w</math>, <math>u\Vdash A</math> implies <math>u\Vdash B</math>,
| |
| * not <math>w\Vdash\bot</math>.
| |
| | |
| Intuitionistic logic is sound and complete with respect to its Kripke
| |
| semantics, and it has the Finite Model Property.
| |
| | |
| '''Intuitionistic first-order logic'''
| |
| | |
| Let ''L'' be a [[first-order logic|first-order]] language. A Kripke
| |
| model of ''L'' is a triple
| |
| <math>\langle W,\le,\{M_w\}_{w\in W}\rangle</math>, where
| |
| <math>\langle W,\le\rangle</math> is an intuitionistic Kripke frame, ''M<sub>w</sub>'' is a
| |
| (classical) ''L''-structure for each node ''w'' ∈ ''W'', and
| |
| the following compatibility conditions hold whenever ''u'' ≤ ''v'':
| |
| * the domain of ''M<sub>u</sub>'' is included in the domain of ''M<sub>v</sub>'',
| |
| * realizations of function symbols in ''M<sub>u</sub>'' and ''M<sub>v</sub>'' agree on elements of ''M<sub>u</sub>'',
| |
| * for each ''n''-ary predicate ''P'' and elements ''a''<sub>1</sub>,...,''a<sub>n</sub>'' ∈ ''M<sub>u</sub>'': if ''P''(''a''<sub>1</sub>,...,''a<sub>n</sub>'') holds in ''M<sub>u</sub>'', then it holds in ''M<sub>v</sub>''.
| |
| Given an evaluation ''e'' of variables by elements of ''M<sub>w</sub>'', we
| |
| define the satisfaction relation <math>w\Vdash A[e]</math>:
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash P(t_1,\dots,t_n)[e]</math> if and only if <math>P(t_1[e],\dots,t_n[e])</math> holds in ''M<sub>w</sub>'',
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash(A\land B)[e]</math> if and only if <math>w\Vdash A[e]</math> and <math>w\Vdash B[e]</math>,
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash(A\lor B)[e]</math> if and only if <math>w\Vdash A[e]</math> or <math>w\Vdash B[e]</math>,
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash(A\to B)[e]</math> if and only if for all <math>u\ge w</math>, <math>u\Vdash A[e]</math> implies <math>u\Vdash B[e]</math>,
| |
| * not <math>w\Vdash\bot[e]</math>,
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash(\exists x\,A)[e]</math> if and only if there exists an <math>a\in M_w</math> such that <math>w\Vdash A[e(x\to a)]</math>,
| |
| * <math>w\Vdash(\forall x\,A)[e]</math> if and only if for every <math>u\ge w</math> and every <math>a\in M_u</math>, <math>u\Vdash A[e(x\to a)]</math>.
| |
| Here ''e''(''x''→''a'') is the evaluation which gives ''x'' the
| |
| value ''a'', and otherwise agrees with ''e''.
| |
| | |
| ==''Naming and Necessity''==
| |
| | |
| {{main|Naming and Necessity}}
| |
| | |
| The three lectures that form ''[[Naming and Necessity]]'' constitute an attack on [[descriptivist theory of names]]. Kripke attributes variants of descriptivist theories to [[Gottlob Frege|Frege]], [[Bertrand Russell|Russell]], [[Ludwig Wittgenstein]] and [[John Searle]], among others. According to descriptivist theories, proper names either are synonymous with descriptions, or have their reference determined by virtue of the name's being associated with a description or cluster of descriptions that an object uniquely satisfies. Kripke rejects both these kinds of descriptivism. He gives several examples purporting to render [[Descriptivist theory of names|descriptivism]] implausible as a theory of how names get their references determined (e.g., surely [[Aristotle]] could have died at age two and so not satisfied any of the descriptions we associate with his name, and yet it would seem wrong to deny that he was Aristotle).
| |
| | |
| As an alternative, Kripke outlined a [[Causal theory of names|causal theory of reference]], according to which a name refers to an object by virtue of a causal connection with the object as mediated through communities of speakers. He points out that proper names, in contrast to most descriptions, are [[rigid designation|rigid designators]]. That is, a proper name refers to the named object in every [[possible worlds|possible world]] in which the object exists, while most descriptions designate different objects in different possible worlds. For example, 'Nixon' refers to the same person in every possible world in which Nixon exists, while 'the person who won the [[United States presidential election, 1968|United States presidential election of 1968']] could refer to [[Richard Nixon|Nixon]], Humphrey, or others in different possible worlds.
| |
| | |
| Kripke also raised the prospect of ''[[A Posteriori Necessity|a posteriori necessities]]'' — facts that are [[necessarily true]], though they can be known only through empirical investigation. Examples include "[[Hesperus]] is [[Phosphorus (morning star)|Phosphorus]]", "[[Cicero]] is [[Tully]]", "Water is H<sub>2</sub>O" and other identity claims where two names refer to the same object.
| |
| | |
| Finally, Kripke gave an argument against [[physicalism|identity materialism]] in the [[philosophy of mind]], the view that every mental particular is identical with some physical particular. Kripke argued that the only way to defend this identity is as an ''a posteriori'' necessary identity, but that such an identity — e.g., pain is [[C fiber|C-fibers]] firing — could not be necessary, given the (clearly conceivable) possibility that pain be separate from the firing of C-fibers, or the firing of C-fibers be separate from pain (See: Zombies [Philosophy]). Similar arguments have been proposed by [[David Chalmers]].<ref>Chalmers, David. 1996. ''The Conscious Mind.'' [[Oxford University Press]] pp. 146-9.</ref> In any event, the psychophysical identity theorist, according to Kripke, incurs a dialectical obligation to explain the apparent logical possibility of these circumstances, for in the opinion of such theorists they should be impossible.
| |
| | |
| Kripke delivered the [[John Locke lectures]] in philosophy at [[Oxford]] in 1973. Titled ''Reference and Existence'', they are in many respects a continuation of ''Naming and Necessity'', and deal with the subjects of fictional names and perceptual error. They have recently been published by Oxford University Press.
| |
| | |
| In a 1995 paper, philosopher [[Quentin Smith]] argued that key concepts in Kripke's new theory of reference had originated from the work of [[Ruth Barcan Marcus]] more than a decade earlier.<ref>{{cite journal | last=Smith |first=Quentin |date=2 August 2001 | title=Marcus, Kripke, and the Origin of the New Theory of Reference |journal=Synthese |volume= 104 |issue= 2 |pages=179–189 | url=http://www.qsmithwmu.com/marcus,_kripke,_and_the_origin_of_the_new_theory_of_reference.htm |accessdate=2007-05-28 | doi=10.1007/BF01063869|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20060507144448/http://www.qsmithwmu.com/marcus,_kripke,_and_the_origin_of_the_new_theory_of_reference.htm|archivedate=2006-05-07}}</ref> Smith identified six significant ideas to the New Theory that he claimed Marcus had developed: (1) The idea that proper names are direct references, which don't consist of contained definitions. (2) While one can single out a single thing by a description, this description is not equivalent with a proper name of this thing. (3) The modal argument that proper names are directly referential, and not disguised descriptions. (4) A formal modal logic proof of the necessity of identity. (5) The concept of a [[rigid designator]], though the actual name of the concept was coined by Kripke.(6) The idea of a posteriori identity. Smith proceeded to argue that Kripke failed to understand Marcus' theory at the time, yet later adopted many of its key conceptual themes in his New Theory of Reference.
| |
| | |
| Other scholars have subsequently offered detailed responses arguing that no plagiarism occurred.<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://web.gc.cuny.edu/philosophy/faculty/neale/papers/NealeKripke.pdf | author=[[Stephen Neale]] |title=No Plagiarism Here | journal=[[Times Literary Supplement]] | pages=12–13 | date = 9 February 2001 | accessdate = 2009-11-13 |format =.PDF |doi=10.1007/BF01063869 |volume=104 |issue=2}}</ref><ref>John Burgess, "Marcus, Kripke, and Names" ''Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition'', 84: 1, pp. 1-47.</ref>
| |
| | |
| =="A Puzzle about Belief"==
| |
| Kripke's main propositions in ''Naming and Necessity'' concerning proper names are that the meaning of a name simply is the object it refers to and that a name's referent is determined by a causal link between some sort of "baptism" and the utterance of the name. Nevertheless he acknowledges the possibility that propositions containing names may have some additional semantic properties,<ref>Kripke, 1980, p. 20</ref> properties that could explain why two names referring to the same person may give different [[truth value]]s in propositions about beliefs. For example, Lois Lane believes that Superman can fly, although she does not believe that Clark Kent can fly. This can be accounted for if the names "Superman" and "Clark Kent", though referring to the same person, have distinct semantic properties.
| |
| | |
| In the article "A Puzzle about Belief" Kripke seems to oppose even this possibility. His argument can be reconstructed in the following way: The idea that two names referring to the same object may have different semantic properties is supposed to explain that [[Coreference|coreferring]] names behave differently in propositions about beliefs (as in Lois Lane's case). But the same phenomenon occurs even with coreferring names that obviously have the same semantic properties:
| |
| | |
| Kripke invites us to imagine a French, monolingual boy, Pierre, who believes the following: "Londres est joli." ("London is beautiful.") Pierre moves to London without realizing that London = Londres. He then learns English the same way a child would learn the language, that is, not by translating words from French to English. Pierre learns the name "London" from the unattractive part of the city in which he lives, so he comes to believe that London is not beautiful. If Kripke's account is correct, Pierre now believes both that "Londres" is "joli" and that "London" is not beautiful. This cannot be explained by coreferring names having different semantic properties. According to Kripke, this demonstrates that attributing additional semantic properties to names does not explain what it is intended to.
| |
| | |
| ==Wittgenstein==
| |
| First published in 1982, Kripke's ''[[Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language]]'' contends that the central argument of [[Wittgenstein]]'s ''[[Philosophical Investigations]]'' centers on a devastating rule-following paradox that undermines the possibility of our ever following rules in our use of language. Kripke writes that this paradox is "the most radical and original skeptical problem that philosophy has seen to date." (p. 60) Kripke argues that Wittgenstein does not reject the argument that leads to the rule-following paradox, but accepts it and offers a 'skeptical solution' to ameliorate the paradox's destructive effects.
| |
| | |
| Whilst most commentators{{Citation needed|date=April 2009}} accept that the ''Philosophical Investigations'' contains the rule-following paradox as Kripke presents it, few have concurred with Kripke when he attributes a skeptical solution to Wittgenstein. It should be noted that Kripke himself expresses doubts in ''Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language'' as to whether Wittgenstein would endorse his interpretation of the ''Philosophical Investigations.'' He says that the work should not be read as an attempt to give an accurate statement of Wittgenstein's views, but rather as an account of Wittgenstein's argument "as it struck Kripke, as it presented a problem for him" (p. 5).
| |
| | |
| The portmanteau "Kripkenstein" has been coined as a jesting nickname for Kripke's reading of the ''Philosophical Investigations''. The real significance of "Kripkenstein" was to put forward a clear statement of a new kind of skepticism, dubbed "meaning skepticism", which is the idea that for an isolated individual there is no fact in virtue of which he/she means one thing rather than another by the use of a word. Kripke's "skeptical solution" to meaning skepticism is to ground meaning in the behavior of a community.
| |
| | |
| Kripke's book generated a large secondary literature,{{Citation needed|date=April 2009}} divided between those who find his skeptical problem interesting and perceptive, and others, such as [[Gordon Baker]] and [[Peter Hacker]], who argue that his meaning skepticism is a pseudo-problem that stems from a confused, selective reading of Wittgenstein. Kripke's position has, however recently been defended against these and other attacks by the Cambridge philosopher [[Martin Kusch]] (2006), and Wittgenstein scholar [[David G. Stern]] considers the book to be "the most influential and widely discussed" work on Wittgenstein since the 1980s.<ref>Stern, David G. 2006. Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. p. 2</ref>
| |
| | |
| ==Truth==
| |
| {{Generalize|section|date=October 2009}}
| |
| In his 1975 article "Outline of a Theory of Truth", Kripke showed that a language can consistently contain its own [[truth]] predicate, which was deemed impossible by [[Alfred Tarski]], a pioneer in the area of formal theories of truth. The approach involves letting truth be a partially defined property over the set of grammatically well-formed sentences in the language. Kripke showed how to do this recursively by starting from the set of expressions in a language which do not contain the truth predicate, and defining a truth predicate over just that segment: this action adds new sentences to the language, and truth is in turn defined for all of them. Unlike Tarski's approach, however, Kripke's lets "truth" be the union of all of these definition-stages; after a denumerable infinity of steps the language reaches a "fixed point" such that using Kripke's method to expand the truth-predicate does ''not'' change the language any further. Such a fixed point can then be taken as the basic form of a natural language containing its own truth predicate. But this predicate is undefined for any sentences that do not, so to speak, "bottom out" in simpler sentences not containing a truth predicate. That is, " 'Snow is white' is true" is well-defined, as is " ' "Snow is white" is true' is true," and so forth, but neither "This sentence is true" nor "This sentence is not true" receive truth-conditions; they are, in Kripke's terms, "ungrounded."
| |
| | |
| Nevertheless, it has been shown by [[Proof sketch for Gödel's first incompleteness theorem|Gödel]] that self-reference cannot be avoided naively, since propositions about seemingly unrelated objects (such as integers) can have an informal self-referential meaning, and this idea - manifested by the [[diagonal lemma]] - is the basis for [[Tarski's undefinability theorem|Tarski's theorem]] that truth cannot be consistently defined. It has thus been claimed <ref>Keith Simmons, ''Universality and the Liar: An Essay on Truth and the Diagonal Argument'', Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1993</ref> that Kripke's suggestion does lead to contradiction: while its truth predicate is only partial, it does give truth value (true/false) to propositions such as the one built in Tarski's proof, and is therefore inconsistent. While there is still a debate on whether Tarski's proof can be implemented to every variation of such a partial truth system, none have been shown to be consistent by [[Consistency proof|acceptable proving methods]] used in [[mathematical logic]].
| |
| | |
| ==Religious views==
| |
| Kripke is an observant Jew.<ref>
| |
| "Kripke is Jewish, and he takes this seriously. He is not a nominal Jew and he is careful keeping the Sabbath, for instance he doesn't use public transportation on Saturdays." Andreas Saugstad, [http://goinside.com/2001/02/25/saul-kripke-genius-logician/ "Saul Kripke: Genius logician"], 25 February 2001.</ref>
| |
| Discussing how his religious views influenced his philosophical views (in an interview with Andreas Saugstad) he stated: "I don't have the prejudices many have today, I don't believe in a [[naturalism (philosophy)|naturalist]] world view. I don't base my thinking on prejudices or a worldview and do not believe in [[materialism]]."<ref>Andreas Saugstad, [http://goinside.com/2001/02/25/saul-kripke-genius-logician/ "Saul Kripke: Genius logician"], 25 February 2001.</ref>
| |
| | |
| ==Awards and recognitions==
| |
| *[[Fulbright Scholar]] (1962–1963)
| |
| *[[Society of Fellows]], [[Harvard University]] (1963–1966).
| |
| *Doctor of Humane Letters, honorary degree, [[University of Nebraska]], 1977.
| |
| *Fellow, [[American Academy of Arts and Sciences]] (1978–).
| |
| *Corresponding Fellow, [[British Academy]] (1985–).
| |
| *Howard Behrman Award, [[Princeton University]], 1988.
| |
| *Fellow, Academia Scientiarum et Artium Europaea (1993–).
| |
| *Doctor of Humane Letters, honorary degree, [[Johns Hopkins University]], 1997.
| |
| *Doctor of Humane Letters, honorary degree, [[University of Haifa]], Israel, 1998.
| |
| *Fellow, Norwegian Academy of Sciences (2000–).
| |
| *[[Schock Prize]] in Logic and Philosophy, [[Swedish Academy of Sciences]], 2001.
| |
| *Doctor of Humane Letters, honorary degree, [[University of Pennsylvania]], 2005.
| |
| *Fellow, [[American Philosophical Society]] (2005–).
| |
| | |
| ==Works==
| |
| | |
| ===Books===
| |
| * ''[[Naming and Necessity]]''. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-59845-8 and reprints 1972.
| |
| * ''[[Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language|Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language: an Elementary Exposition]]''. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1982. ISBN 0-674-95401-7. Sets out his interpretation of [[Wittgenstein]] aka [[Kripkenstein]].
| |
| * ''[[Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. 1]]''. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. ISBN 9780199730155
| |
| * ''[[Reference and Existence. The John Locke Lectures]]''. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013. ISBN 9780199928385
| |
| | |
| ===Abstracts and articles===
| |
| * 1959. "A Completeness Theorem in Modal Logic", ''Journal of Symbolic Logic'' 24(1):1–14.
| |
| * 1959. "Distinguished Constituents" (abstract), ''The Journal of Symbolic Logic'', 24(4):323.
| |
| *1959. "Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic" (abstract), ''The Journal of Symbolic Logic'', 24(4):323-324.
| |
| *1959. "The Problem of Entailment" (abstract), ''The Journal of Symbolic Logic'', 24(4):324.
| |
| *1962. "'Flexible' Predicates of Formal Number Theory," ''Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society'', 13(4):647-650.
| |
| * 1962. "The Undecidability of Monadic Modal Quantification Theory", ''Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik'' 8:113–116
| |
| * 1963. "Semantical Considerations on Modal Logic", ''Acta Philosophica Fennica'' 16:83–94
| |
| * 1963. "Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic I: Normal Modal Propositional Calculi", ''Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik'' 9:67–96
| |
| * 1964. "Transfinite Recursions on Admissible Ordinals, I" (abstract), ''The Journal of Symbolic Logic'', Vol. 29, No. 3, p. 162.
| |
| * 1964. "Transfinite Recursions on Admissible Ordinals, II" (abstract), ''The Journal of Symbolic Logic'', Vol. 29, No. 3, p. 162.
| |
| * 1964. "Admissible Ordinals and the Analytic Hierarchy" (abstract), ''The Journal of Symbolic Logic'', Vol. 29, No. 3, p. 162.
| |
| * 1965. "Semantical Analysis of Intuitionistic Logic I", In ''Formal Systems and Recursive Functions'', edited by M. Dummett and J. N. Crossley. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co.
| |
| * 1965. "Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic II: Non-Normal Modal Propositional Calculi", In ''The Theory of Models'', edited by J. W. Addison, L. Henkin and A. Tarski. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co.
| |
| * 1967. Research Announcement: "Deduction-preserving 'Recursive Isomorphisms' between Theories" (with Marian Boykan Pour-El), ''Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society'', 73:145-148.
| |
| * 1967. "An Extension of a Theorem of Gaifman-Hales-Solovay," ''Fundamenta Mathematicae'', Vol. 61, pp. 29–32.
| |
| * 1967. "Transfinite Recursion, Constructible Sets, and Analogues of Cardinals," Summaries of Talks Prepared in Connection with the Summer Institute on Axiomatic Set Theory, American Mathematical Society, U.C.L.A., pp. IV-0-1 - IV-0-12.
| |
| * 1967. "On the Application of Boolean-Valued Models to Solutions of Problems in Boolean Algebra," in Summaries of Talks Prepared in Connection with the Summer Institute on Axiomatic Set Theory, American Mathematical Society, U.C.L.A. (1967), pp. IV-T-1 through IV-T-7.
| |
| * 1967. "Deduction-preserving 'Recursive Isomorphisms' between Theories" (with Marian Boykan Pour-El), ''Fundamenta Mathematicae'' 61:141-163.
| |
| * 1971. "Identity and Necessity", In ''Identity and Individuation'', edited by M. K. Munitz. New York: New York University Press. Reprinted in ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 1972 (1980). "Naming and Necessity", In ''Semantics of Natural Language'', edited by D. Davidson and G. Harman. Dordrecht; Boston: Reidel. Sets out the [[causal theory of reference]].
| |
| * 1975. "Outline of a Theory of Truth", ''Journal of Philosophy'' 72:690–716. Reprinted in ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press. Sets his theory of truth (against Alfred Tarski), where an object language can contain its own truth predicate.
| |
| * 1976. "Is There a Problem about Substitutional Quantification?", In ''Truth and Meaning: Essays in Semantics'', edited by Gareth Evans and John McDowell. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 1976. "A Theory of Truth I. Preliminary Report," abstract, ''Journal of Symbolic Logic'', Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 556.
| |
| * 1976. "A Theory of Truth II. Preliminary Report," abstract, ''Journal of Symbolic Logic'', Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 556–557.
| |
| * 1977. "Speaker's Reference and Semantic Reference", ''Midwest Studies in Philosophy'' 2:255–276.Reprinted in ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 1979. "A Puzzle about Belief", In ''Meaning and Use'', edited by A. Margalit. Dordrecht and Boston: Reidel.Reprinted in ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 1982. "Nonstandard Models of Peano Arithmetic" (with S. Kochen), in ''Logic and Algorithmics: International Symposium Held in Honor of Ernst Specker'', H. Lauchli (ed.), University of Geneva: 277-295.
| |
| * 1986. "A Problem in the Theory of Reference: the Linguistic Division of Labor and the Social Character of Naming," ''Philosophy and Culture (Proceedings of the XVIIth World Congress of Philosophy)'', Montreal, Editions Montmorency: 241-247.
| |
| * 1992. "Summary: Individual Concepts: Their Logic, Philosophy, and Some of Their Uses." ''Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association'' 66: 70-73
| |
| * 2005. "Russell's Notion of Scope", ''Mind'' 114:1005–1037. Reprinted in ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 2008. "Frege's Theory of Sense and Reference: Some Exegetical Notes," ''Theoria'' 74:181-218. Reprinted in ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 2009. "Presupposition and Anaphora: Remarks on the formulation of the projection problem," ''Linguistic Inquiry'' 40(3):367-386.Reprinted in ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 2009. "The Collapse of the Hilbert Program," (Abstract) ''Bulletin of Symbolic Logic'' 15(2):229-231.
| |
| * 2011. "The First Person," ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press. The videos "The First Person" and "Questions and Answers" in which the paper is based are available [http://web.gc.cuny.edu/philosophy/events/kripke_conference.htm here].
| |
| * 2011. "Two Paradoxes of Knowledge," ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 2011. "Nozick on Knowledge," ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 2011. "A Puzzle about Time and Thought," ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 2011. "Vacuous Names and Fictional Entities," ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press.
| |
| * 2011. "Unrestricted Exportation and Some Morals for the Philosophy of Language," ''Philosophical Troubles. Collected Papers Vol. I'', Oxford University Press. Podcast of the talk available [http://www1.cuny.edu/portal_ur/news/radio/podcast/lecture_143.mp3 here].
| |
| * 2013. "The Church-Turing 'Thesis' as a Special Corollary of Gödel's Completeness Theorem," in ''Computability: Turing, Gödel, Church, and Beyond,'' Copeland, B. J., Posy, C., and Shagrir, O. (eds), Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press.
| |
| | |
| ===Unpublished manuscripts and lectures===
| |
| * 1963. "History and Idealism: the Theory of R. G. Collingwood".
| |
| * 1975. "Three Lectures on Truth". Princeton University. Discussed [http://www.princeton.edu/~jburgess/Kripke2.doc here].
| |
| * 197-. "On The Completeness and Decidability of Intuitionistic Propositional Logic".
| |
| * 1978. "Time and Identity". Seminar given at Princeton University, 1978. Several versions of this material have circulated. Some of its ideas are discussed by Ted Sider in his book ''Four-Dimensionalism: An Ontology of Persistence and Time''
| |
| * 19- "Non-Standard Models and Godel's Theorem: A Model-Theoretic Proof of Godel's Theorem". [http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS/Repository/1.0/Disseminate?view=body&id=pdf_1&handle=euclid.ndjfl/1027953483 Summary] by [[Hilary Putnam]].
| |
| * 1984. "Lessons on Functionalism and Automata". Delivered at the International Wittgenstein Symposium, 1984. Transcribed by [[Roderick Chisholm]].<ref>Edward P. Stabler, "[http://www.springerlink.com/content/lr745776l7g24u63/ "Kripke on functionalism and automata]", ''Synthese'', Vol. 70 No. 1 (1987).</ref>
| |
| * 198-. "A Proof of Gamma."
| |
| * 198-. "A Note on Zabludowski's Critique of Goodman's Theory of Projection".
| |
| * 1986. "Rigid Designation and the Contingent A Priori: The Meter Stick Revisited" (Notre Dame, 1986).
| |
| * 1988/89. "Seminars on Truth". Three-semester seminar at Princeton in 1988-89, only the first two semesters have been transcribed by Jim Cain. See [http://www.princeton.edu/~jburgess/Kripke2.doc here].
| |
| * 19- "Semantical Analysis of Intuitionistic Logic II. Undecidability of the Monadic Fragment" (Undated manuscript).
| |
| * 19- "Semantical Analysis of Intuitionistic Logic III" (Undated manuscript).
| |
| * 1989. "No Fool's Red? Some Considerations on the Primary/Secondary Quality Distinction"(includes comments by David Velleman). University of Michigan, 1989.
| |
| * 1992. Whitehead Lectures: "Logicism, Wittgenstein, and De Re Beliefs about Natural Numbers". Delivered at Harvard University, 1992.
| |
| * 1992. "Individual Concepts: Their Logic, Philosophy, and Some of Their Uses". Transcribed by Stephen Webb.
| |
| * 1996."The Ordered Pair: A Philosophical Paradigm Revisited".
| |
| * 1996. "Elementary Recursion Theory and its Applications to Formal Systems." Transcribed by Mario Gomez Torrente and John Barker. Index available [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:y-DdYr9dhj8J:www.phil.uu.nl/~jjoosten/krip/notes/pschomps/Kripke-Frontmatter.ps+saul+kripke+the+road+to+godel&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5 here].
| |
| * 1999. "The Road to Gödel". (Read at Haifa University, Israel, 1999. Several transcripts exist.)
| |
| * 2006. "From Church's Thesis to the First Order Algorithm Theorem," Tel Aviv University, June 13, 2006. Video available [http://www.vanleer.org.il/eng/videoShow.asp?id=317 here] and abstract available [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=788022.789011 here].
| |
| * 2007. "Roundtable on Externalism" ([[Hilary Putnam]], [[Tyler Burge]], Saul Kripke, and [[Michael Devitt]]). University College Dublin, Ireland. Podcast available [http://www.ucd.ie/news/mar07/030507_Putnam_Award.htm here].
| |
| * 2007. "The Collapse of the Hilbert Program". Indiana University, Presidential Lecture. Video available [http://broadcast.iu.edu/ceremon/celeb07/index.html here].
| |
| * 2008. "Mathematical Incompleteness Results in Peano Arithmetic, a Revisionist View of the Early History".
| |
| | |
| ===Interviews and articles===
| |
| * "[http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10A12F73F5A107B93C6A81783D85F438785F9&scp=1&sq=new%20frontiers%20in%20american%20philosophy&st=cse New Frontiers in American Philosophy]" by Taylor Branch, ''[[New York Times Magazine]]'', August 14, 1977.
| |
| * "[http://goinside.com/2001/02/25/saul-kripke-genius-logician/ Saul Kripke, Genius Logician]." Interview by Andreas Saugstad, February 25, 2001.
| |
| * "[http://www.nysun.com/article/26585 Celebrating CUNY's Genius Philosopher]" by Gary Shapiro, ''[[The New York Sun]]'', January 27, 2006.
| |
| * "[http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/28/books/28krip.html Philosopher, 65, Lectures Not About 'What Am I?' but 'What Is I?']" by Charles McGrath, ''[[The New York Times]]'', January 28, 2006.
| |
| * "[http://fivebooks.com/interviews/scott-soames-on-philosophy-language The Best Five Books on the Philosophy of Language"] by Scott Soames, October 15, 2010.
| |
| | |
| ==See also==
| |
| {{Portal|Philosophy|Logic}}
| |
| * [[Disquotational principle]]
| |
| * [[American philosophy]]
| |
| * [[List of American philosophers]]
| |
| * [[Barry Kripke]] (a character on ''[[The Big Bang Theory]]'' who is believed to be named after Saul)
| |
| | |
| ==References==
| |
| {{Reflist}}
| |
| | |
| ==Further reading==
| |
| *Taylor Branch (1977), "New Frontiers in American Philosophy: Saul Kripke". ''New York Times Magazine''.
| |
| *[[Nathan Salmon]] (1981), ''Reference and Essence''. ISBN 1-59102-215-0 ISBN 978-1591022152.
| |
| *Consuelo Preti (2002), ''On Kripke''. Wadsworth. ISBN 0-534-58366-0.
| |
| *Scott Soames (2002), ''Beyond Rigidity: The Unfinished Semantic Agenda of Naming and Necessity''. ISBN 0-19-514529-1.
| |
| *Christopher Hughes (2004), ''Kripke : Names, Necessity, and Identity''. ISBN 0-19-824107-0.
| |
| *G.W. Fitch (2005), ''Saul Kripke''. ISBN 0-7735-2885-7.
| |
| *Martin Kusch (2006), ''A sceptical Guide to Meaning and Rules. Defending Kripke's Wittgenstein''. Acumben: Publishing Limited.
| |
| *Arif Ahmed (2007), ''Saul Kripke''. New York, NY; London: Continuum. ISBN 0-8264-9262-2.
| |
| *Christopher Norris (2007), ''Fiction, Philosophy and Literary Theory: Will the Real Saul Kripke Please Stand Up?'' London: Continuum
| |
| | |
| ==External links==
| |
| {{Wikiquote}}
| |
| * [http://web.gc.cuny.edu/philosophy/people/kripke.html CUNY Graduate Center Philosophy Department faculty page]
| |
| * [http://kripkecenter.commons.gc.cuny.edu The Saul Kripke Center, at the CUNY Graduate Center]
| |
| * [http://philosophy.commons.gc.cuny.edu/category/faculty/kripke/ Saul Kripke's archive on the CUNY Philosophy Commons]
| |
| * [http://philosophy.commons.gc.cuny.edu/john-burgess-kripke-center-lecture-the-origin-of-necessity-and-the-necessity-of-origin/ Second Annual Saul Kripke Lecture by John Burgess on the Necessity of Origin at the CUNY Graduate Center, November 13th, 2012]
| |
| *{{MathGenealogy|id=13743}}
| |
| * [http://goinside.com/2001/02/25/saul-kripke-genius-logician/ Saul Kripke, Genius Logician] A short, non-technical interview by Andreas Saugstad, February 25, 2001.
| |
| * [http://web.gc.cuny.edu/philosophy/events/kripke_conference.htm The conference in honor of Kripke's sixty-fifth birthday] with a video of his speech "The First Person", January 25–26, 2006
| |
| * [http://www.vanleer.org.il/eng/videoShow.asp?id=317 Video of his talk "From Church's Thesis to the First Order Algorithm Theorem,"] June 13, 2006.
| |
| * [http://www1.cuny.edu/portal_ur/news/radio/podcast/lecture_143.mp3 Podcast of his talk "Unrestricted Exportation and Some Morals for the Philosophy of Language,"] May 21, 2008.
| |
| * [http://www.lrb.co.uk/v26/n20/fodo01_.html London Review of Books article by Jerry Fodor discussing Kripke's work]
| |
| * [http://www.nysun.com/article/26585 Celebrating CUNY's Genius Philosopher], by Gary Shapiro, January 27, 2006, in [[The New York Sun]].
| |
| * [http://www.wisdomsupreme.com/dictionary/saul-kripke.php information from 'Wisdom Supreme' website]
| |
| * [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/28/books/28krip.html A New York Times article about his 65th birthday]
| |
| * [http://hardproblem.ru/events/a-round-table-with-scott-soames-on-argument-on-pain/ Roundtable on Kripke's critique of mind-body identity with Scott Soames as the main presenter] May 26, 2010.
| |
| | |
| {{Analytic philosophy}}
| |
| {{Logic}}
| |
| {{Metaphysics}}
| |
| {{Epistemology}}
| |
| {{Philosophy of language}}
| |
| {{Schock Prize laureates}}
| |
| {{Ludwig Wittgenstein}}
| |
| | |
| {{Authority control |VIAF=108251834 |LCCN=n/79/128358 |GND=118813455}}
| |
| | |
| {{Persondata
| |
| | NAME = Kripke, Aaron
| |
| | ALTERNATIVE NAMES =
| |
| | SHORT DESCRIPTION = American philosopher
| |
| | DATE OF BIRTH = November 13, 1940
| |
| | PLACE OF BIRTH = [[Bay Shore, New York]]
| |
| | DATE OF DEATH =
| |
| | PLACE OF DEATH =
| |
| }}
| |
| {{DEFAULTSORT:Kripke, Aaron}}
| |
| [[Category:1940 births]]
| |
| [[Category:20th-century philosophers]]
| |
| [[Category:21st-century philosophers]]
| |
| [[Category:American philosophers]]
| |
| [[Category:Analytic philosophers]]
| |
| [[Category:Harvard University alumni]]
| |
| [[Category:Princeton University faculty]]
| |
| [[Category:Jewish American writers]]
| |
| [[Category:Jewish philosophers]]
| |
| [[Category:Living people]]
| |
| [[Category:Logicians]]
| |
| [[Category:Metaphysicians]]
| |
| [[Category:Philosophers of language]]
| |
| [[Category:Rolf Schock Prize laureates]]
| |
| [[Category:Jews and Judaism in Omaha, Nebraska]]
| |
| [[Category:Members of the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters]]
| |
| [[Category:Modal logicians]]
| |
| [[Category:Members of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts]]
| |
| [[Category:Jewish American academics]]
| |
| [[Category:Guggenheim Fellows]]
| |