Abstract

In this paper a refutation of Putnam’s twin-earth argument designed to show that the meaning is outside our heads is proposed. Moreover, Kripke’s suggestion that “Water is H2O” is a necessary a posteriori truth is refuted. These rebutals result from the development of a more elaborated neofregean and neodescriptivist analysis of the concept of water, which is done in the three first sections of the paper

Keywords: Natural kind, general terms, externalism-internalism, twin-earth, identity.