ABSTRACT

If it is SWIMS-1 that plays the role of proto-proposition, then it will be PR-1, the ‘propositional relation’ associated with that initial iteration of King’s account, which will come to encode instantiation. If so, the proposition will be identified, not with SWIMS-3, but with the following fact:

SWIMS-2.5 differs from SWIMS-3 only in that it omits the provision that R encodes instantiation, and skips straight to the requirement that the ‘propositional relation’ of the proto-proposition (PR-1 in this case) does so. It is clear upon examination that SWIMS-2.5 is just as qualified as SWIMS-3 to play the role of the proposition that Sophie swims.9 After all, it has identical constituents and syntax, as well as the same intrinsic truth conditions. It appears, then, that King’s account does face a Benacerraf problem.