Preparation for 7.February meeting

I wrote another short paper in the effort to get clear on and offer some criticisms of Kirk Ludwig's "A Conservative Modal Semantics with Applications to de re Nececssities and Arguments for Coincident Entities". The main idea in the paper is that if there are appropriate description names (explained by the relationship of numbers and numerals for the purposes of exposition) conceptual necessity can be taken as the primary notion of necessity and more specifically necessity can be made sense of in terms of analyticity in the context of an interpretive truth theory. Of course, my main concern was whether description names (which at once pick out a referent directly and make use of some conceptual content) are always in principle available.