直接指称论的反描述论论证主要有三种,即模态论证、认识论论证和语义学论证。多数语言哲学家相信,这三个论证对于反驳一般的关于物理对象名字的指称描述论是有效的。但是,三个论证对于一种可能的虚构对象名字的描述论是否有效,是一个需要讨论的问题。本文根据虚构对象名字在语义上依赖于性质描述的特点,根据这种描述所产生的模态性质、认识论性质和语义学性质,最终得出否定性的结论:三个反描述论论证对于反驳虚构对象名字的描述理论是无效的。因此,对于反驳描述理论来说,如果直接指称论者使用的三个论证确实具有不可替代的作用,则至少对于某些种类的名字,指称的描述理论得到了一定程度的支持。 There are mainly three kinds of anti-descriptive argument of direct allegation: modal argument, epistemological argument, and semantic argument. Most linguistic philosophers believe these three arguments are valid for refuting the general allegations of physical object names. However, the validity of the three arguments about the description of a possible fictional object name is a question that needs to be discussed. According to the semantic dependence of the name of the fictional object on the description of the nature of the character, based on the modal, epistemological and semantic nature of this description, the thesis concludes the negative conclusion: the three anti-descriptive arguments argue against the fiction The description of the object name theory is invalid. Thus, to the theory of refutation, if the three arguments used directly by the arguer do indeed play an irreplaceable role, at least for some kinds of names, the alleged description theory is somewhat supported.