The review discusses Rudolf Carnap's book "Meaning and Necessity," focusing on his theory of meaning and logical modalities. Carnap's approach to meaning-analysis is presented as an improvement over Frege's and C.I. Lewis's theories. However, the reviewer argues that both Frege's and Carnap's theories are flawed. The reviewer criticizes Carnap's use of terms like "designator" and "predicator," which are ambiguous and vague. Carnap's theory of intension and extension is also questioned, as it leads to confusion. The reviewer points out that Carnap's theory of meaning is overly simplistic and fails to account for the complexities of language and meaning. The reviewer concludes that Carnap's work is technically sophisticated but philosophically naive, and that his theories may hinder progress in semantic problems. The review highlights the importance of semantic problems in philosophy and logic, and expresses concern that Carnap's mistakes may impede progress in this area.The review discusses Rudolf Carnap's book "Meaning and Necessity," focusing on his theory of meaning and logical modalities. Carnap's approach to meaning-analysis is presented as an improvement over Frege's and C.I. Lewis's theories. However, the reviewer argues that both Frege's and Carnap's theories are flawed. The reviewer criticizes Carnap's use of terms like "designator" and "predicator," which are ambiguous and vague. Carnap's theory of intension and extension is also questioned, as it leads to confusion. The reviewer points out that Carnap's theory of meaning is overly simplistic and fails to account for the complexities of language and meaning. The reviewer concludes that Carnap's work is technically sophisticated but philosophically naive, and that his theories may hinder progress in semantic problems. The review highlights the importance of semantic problems in philosophy and logic, and expresses concern that Carnap's mistakes may impede progress in this area.