Scholarlink

<p>This paper aims to establish a semantic framework for religious languages. In particular, I focus on the primitive terms of religious languages—namely, <i>religious primitives</i>. The proposed theory is called <i>CAST</i>, the contextual-attributional-social theory of meaning. This is a Putnamian theory of meaning for religious languages, according to which the meaning of a religious primitive is intended to be determined by some <i>externalist</i> factors—ontic, epistemic, and social. I proceed as follows. In §<InternalRef RefID="Sec2">2</InternalRef>, I first consider a Kripke-style causal theory of reference and its core limitation, raised by the problem of meaning-shift. In §<InternalRef RefID="Sec7">3</InternalRef>, I introduce CAST as an alternative framework. After articulating CAST, in §<InternalRef RefID="Sec13">4</InternalRef>, I address potential challenges, including the problem of meaning-shift, and show how CAST can handle them. In §<InternalRef RefID="Sec17">5</InternalRef>, I conclude.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Religious languages: an externalist account

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月20日

查看全文
  • Wonjae Ha

摘要

This paper aims to establish a semantic framework for religious languages. In particular, I focus on the primitive terms of religious languages—namely, religious primitives. The proposed theory is called CAST, the contextual-attributional-social theory of meaning. This is a Putnamian theory of meaning for religious languages, according to which the meaning of a religious primitive is intended to be determined by some externalist factors—ontic, epistemic, and social. I proceed as follows. In §2, I first consider a Kripke-style causal theory of reference and its core limitation, raised by the problem of meaning-shift. In §3, I introduce CAST as an alternative framework. After articulating CAST, in §4, I address potential challenges, including the problem of meaning-shift, and show how CAST can handle them. In §5, I conclude.