ABSTRACT
Until now I’ve tried to accommodate the causal theorist: I’ve tried to show why certain arguments against causality’s major role in fixing reference are misguided. Nevertheless, there’s a (prima facie) serious problem with the idea that causality does underwrite reference, although it’s not quite the problem raised by permutation-plyers. The problem is only prima facie because it is drawn from intuitions we have about reference, and intuitions can sometimes be explained away. In any case, I bring attention to a set of thought experiments that seem to show it’s not necessary that a causal mechanism directly underwrite the referential relation.
