Graduate studies at Western
History and Philosophy of Logic 12 (1):37-69 (1991)
This paper offers an interpretation of Russell's multiple-relation theory of judgment which characterizes it as direct application of the 1905 theory of definite descriptions. The paper maintains that it was by regarding propositional symbols (when occurring as subordinate clauses) as disguised descriptions of complexes, that Russell generated the philosophical explanation of the hierarchy of orders and the ramified theory of types of _Principia mathematica
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Francisco A. Rodriguez Consuegra (1989). Russell's Theory of Types, 1901–1910: Its Complex Origins in the Unpublished Manuscripts. History and Philosophy of Logic 10 (2):131-164.
Gregory Landini (1998). Russell's Hidden Substitutional Theory. Oxford University Press.
Stephen Schiffer (2005). Russell's Theory of Definite Descriptions. Mind 114 (456):1135-1183.
Nicholas Griffin (1985). Russell's Multiple Relation Theory of Judgment. Philosophical Studies 47 (2):213 - 247.
Gregory Landini (1987). Russell's Substitutional Theory of Classes and Relations. History and Philosophy of Logic 8 (2):171-200.
Francisco Rodríguez Consuegra (1992). EI impacto de Wittgenstein sobre Russell. Theoria 7 (1-2):875-911.
Chris Pincock (2008). Russell's Last (And Best) Multiple-Relation Theory of Judgement. Mind 117 (465):107 - 139.
Peter W. Hanks (2007). How Wittgenstein Defeated Russell's Multiple Relation Theory of Judgment. Synthese 154 (1):121 - 146.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads26 ( #53,718 of 740,538 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,957 of 740,538 )
How can I increase my downloads?