Contra Bealer's reductio of direct reference of theory

Abstract

Beater, in a 2004 paper, presents an argument that he takes to be a reductio of what he argues to be the most favourable interpretation of identity sentences available to direct reference theory. We argue that his argument fails. If the dummy mode-of-presentation operator Beater introduces induces extensional contexts then the argument is a trivially valid reductio, since its only premise is identical to the conclusion. But it is untenable that the operator should be extensional. If the operator is intensional then the argument comes out invalid, and so there is no reductio. Either way, the advocates of direct reference theory are at liberty to reject Beater's interpretation, since it is self-contradictory.