{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021779713752333542, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004978220286247666, 'mean_word_length': 4.868613138686132, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Proper Names: Ideas and Chains

The main aim of this paper is to present a certain notion that of Coordination and an associated requirement the Coordination Requirement (CR) -,and to show how they help us to better understand the communicative role of proper names. A second aim of the paper is to use these notions to defend the kind of view I favour regarding the meaning of proper names a certain kind of descriptivist theory by showing that this view is not subject to two seemingly powerful considerations against it that have been provided from two different camps: one from the anti-descriptivist camp (by Saul Kripke in Naming and Necessity), another from the neo-Fregean camp (by Richard Heck in The Sense of Communication). In dealing with these matters, I will have to discuss the role that complex individual concepts (or ideas) play in allowing us to understand and use proper names. In Naming and Necessity (1980), Saul Kripke provides a number of arguments against descriptivist theories of proper names. He suggests that beyond these specific arguments, we know that descriptivism cannot be correct since it is based on a wrong picture of how proper names work. He claims that descriptivism is not compatible with the very plausible general picture about how proper names work that he presents. Against this, I will argue that, because of the Coordination Requirement, even if descriptivism is correct, something very much like a Kripkean picture must still obtain. On the other hand, Richard Heck's The Sense of Communication (1995) presents a complex argument for the view that successful