That distinction is actually quite important for my argument. If you have 10 white marbles and don’t draw one and I asked you “what is the probability that I will draw this specific marble?” you would ask “What marble?” because there has not yet been any event causing you to identify one of the marbles. Thus you need to make one drawing to make an identification. Before you do that drawing there is no de re because there is not yet a “re”. Once you made that first drawing you have an event that causes an identification. And because this first drawing is what you use to identify the one marble, you cannot use this identification before the drawing. Thus even after the first drawing there is no de re interpretation of questions about states before the drawing like the probability of drawing that marble.
That distinction is actually quite important for my argument. If you have 10 white marbles and don’t draw one and I asked you “what is the probability that I will draw this specific marble?” you would ask “What marble?” because there has not yet been any event causing you to identify one of the marbles. Thus you need to make one drawing to make an identification. Before you do that drawing there is no de re because there is not yet a “re”. Once you made that first drawing you have an event that causes an identification. And because this first drawing is what you use to identify the one marble, you cannot use this identification before the drawing. Thus even after the first drawing there is no de re interpretation of questions about states before the drawing like the probability of drawing that marble.