Ed Buckner

Ed Buckner studied and taught philosophy at the University of Bristol in England. He has a number of publications in the area of both analytic philosophy and medieval logic and philosophy. He is the author, with Jack Zupko, of Duns Scotus on Time & Existence, a translation of an early work by the philosopher-theologian Duns Scotus, with a comprehensive and detailed commentary. Now mostly retired, he curates the Logic Museum, a collection of primary sources in the history of logic.


  1. Dale Tuggy
    January 9, 2017 @ 7:26 am

    About your original question at the top of this post, is this a question about words or about things? Seems to me it must be the former: e.g. does “Deus” (used by Anselm) co-refer with the term “ho theos” used by Paul?

    Taken as theoretical entities, one might think Deus and ho theos must be different, as the definitions differ – but of course two people can theorize about the same being, and one gets it more correct than the other.

    I guess I’m trying to get a grip on the religious or theological import of all of this…


  2. Dale Tuggy
    January 9, 2017 @ 7:21 am

    “How do we get from Fa and x=a to Fx? By our old friend Substitution, no less.”

    Let’s see… substitution is that necessarily, if two terms co-refer, then substituting one for the other always preserves the truth of the original sentence. Hasn’t this been shown false by people like Cartwright? e.g. “Superman is so-called because of his powers” (true) and “Clark Kent is so-called because of his powers.” (false)

    But intuitively, necessarily, if “a” refers to the object a, and x *just is* a, then “a” also refers to x. Maybe I’m assuming here that names primarily or only refer, that they’re not encoded descriptions…


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
44 ⁄ 22 =