Russell's notion of scope
Mind 114 (456):1005-1037 (2005)
| Abstract | Despite the renown of ‘On Denoting’, much criticism has ignored or misconstrued Russell's treatment of scope, particularly in intensional, but also in extensional contexts. This has been rectified by more recent commentators, yet it remains largely unnoticed that the examples Russell gives of scope distinctions are questionable or inconsistent with his own philosophy. Nevertheless, Russell is right: scope does matter in intensional contexts. In Principia Mathematica, Russell proves a metatheorem to the effect that the scope of a single occurrence of a description in an extensional context does not matter, provided existence and uniqueness conditions are satisfied. But attempts to eliminate descriptions in more complicated cases may produce an analysis with more occurrences of descriptions than featured in the analysand. Taking alternation and negation to be primitive (as in the first edition of Principia), this can be resolved, although the proof is non-trivial. Taking the Sheffer stroke to be primitive (as proposed by Russell in the second edition), with bad choices of scope the analysis fails to terminate. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesGregory Landini (1987). Russell's Substitutional Theory of Classes and Relations. History and Philosophy of Logic 8 (2):171-200.
Bernard Linsky (2011). The Evolution of Principia Mathematica: Bertrand Russell's Manuscripts and Notes for the Second Edition. Cambridge University Press.
Herbert Hochberg (1995). Particulars As Universals. Journal of Philosophical Research 20:83-111.
Peter Milne (2008). Russell's Completeness Proof. History and Philosophy of Logic 29 (1):31-62.
Gregory Landini (1996). The Definability of the Set of Natural Numbers in the 1925 Principia Mathematica. Journal of Philosophical Logic 25 (6):597 - 615.
Zoltán Gendler Szabó (2005). The Loss of Uniqueness. Mind 114 (456):1185 - 1222.
Marga Reimer & Anne Bezuidenhout (eds.) (2004). Descriptions and Beyond. Oxford University Press.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads193 ( #1,415 of 550,860 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 550,860 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
