语言哲学领域,一般认为“先天”和“必然”这两组概念是等外延的。美国哲学家克里普克在他的文章《命名与必然性》中反驳了这一点。本文通过分析克里普克的反驳和他所提出的反例,论证克里普克的反驳是不成立的。因此,本文是对克里普克的反驳。本文作者支持“先天”和“必然”这两组概念等外延这个结论。 In the field of linguistic philosophy, the two concepts of “innateness” and “inevitability” are generally considered as epitaxial. The American philosopher Kripke argues in his article, “Naming and Necessity.” By analyzing Kripke’s refutation and his counter-examples, this article argues that Kripke’s refutation is not valid. Therefore, this article is a refute of Kripke. The author supports the conclusion that the conceptions such as “innateness” and “inevitability” should be extended.