Baseball and rigid designation

I was reading an article from Fox Sports about a possible trade between the A's and the Rockies. These two sentences appear in the article (here's the link):

"Over the weekend, the teams discussed A's outfielder Carlos Gonzalez, left-hander Greg Smith and reliever Huston Street, according to one source. Those are the players believed to be in the deal, though the names are subject to change."

Maybe the Fox Sports writers are thinking about rigid designation? The players named will remain the same across possible worlds, but the names, of course, can change.

Seminar papers

I'm starting to think about working on the final papers for my seminars this semester. I need to write two: one for metaphysics and one for philosophy of language.

For metaphysics, I'm going to write about dispositions and overdetermination. I'll consider whether or not dispositions overdetermine their manifestations, and what the answer to that question means for our analysis of disposition ascriptions.

For philosophy of language, I'm going to write about supposed necessary aposteriori truths. In the preface to Naming and Necessity, Kripke says (roughly) that he cannot be seen as defending a thoroughgoing Millian account of proper names, since he thinks that "Hesperus is Phosphorus" is an empirical truth. I want to consider an attempt to reconcile this claim with Millianism. Ways of believing and justification will play a part.

Besides that, I'm trying to decide what to take next semester. Here is a list of the courses I may end up taking:

Epistemology (largely formal epistemology, I think) with Jim Van Cleve and Kenny Easwaran

Metaethics (broadly, on 'ought') with Mark Schroeder

Required logic class

Criminal responsibility with Gary Watson