Definite descriptions and existence attribution
Topoi 6 (2):133-138 (1987)
| Abstract | The hierarchical analysis of existence attribution is Fregean in its endorsement of senses, understood as guises. Furthermore, the hierarchical analysis makes an essential use of the Russellian analysis (9′) as a means to understand what it is for a sense to present a given entity (cf. biconditional (11) above). The hierarchical analysis, on the other hand, is more general than the Russellian one and hence - in accordance with natural language usage - allows for a wider range of applications | |||||||||
| 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: 5,664 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesKeith S. Donnellan (1966). Reference and Definite Descriptions. Philosophical Review 75 (3):281-304.
Steven Rieber (1998). The Concept of Personal Identity. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 58 (3):581-594.
Stefano Predelli (2003). Russellian Description and Smith's Suicide. Acta Analytica 18 (1-2):125-141.
Stephen Schiffer (2005). Russell's Theory of Definite Descriptions. Mind 114 (456):1135-1183.
Francesco Pupa (2010). On the Russellian Reformation. Philosophical Studies 147 (2).
ST Kuhn (2000). Embedded Definite Descriptions: Russellian Analysis and Semantic Puzzles. Mind 109 (435):443-454.
Paul Elbourne (2010). The Existence Entailments of Definite Descriptions. Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (1):1-10.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads9 ( #113,980 of 549,006 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,261 of 549,006 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
