Search results for 'theory of descriptions' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Max Rosenkrantz (2009). The Tractatus Theory of Descriptions. Theoria 75 (4):252-271.score: 180.0
    In this article I construe Russell's definite description notation as a fragment of an "ideal language"– a language in which, as Russell puts it in the "Logical Atomism" lectures, "the words in a proposition correspond one by one with the components of the corresponding fact." Russell's notation – containing as it does variables, quantifiers and the identity sign – commits him to an ontology that is lavish indeed. It thus conflicts with the spirit of the theory of descriptions, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Anssi Korhonen (2013). Review: G. Stevens. The Theory of Descriptions: Russell and the Philosophy of Language. [REVIEW] Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 2 (1).score: 123.0
    This is a review of G. Stevens. The Theory of Descriptions: Russell and the Philosophy of Language.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. John Michael Kuczynski (2010). Non-Declarative Sentences and the Theory of Definite Descriptions. Principia 8 (1):119-154.score: 123.0
    This paper shows that Russell’s theory of descriptions gives the wrong semantics for definite descriptions occurring in questions and imperatives. Depending on how that theory is applied, it either assigns nonsense to perfectly meaningful questions and assertions or it assigns meanings that diverge from the actual semantics of such sentences, even after all pragmatic and contextual variables are allowed for. Given that Russell’s theory is wrong for questions and assertions, it must be wrong for assertoric (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Jan Heylen (2010). Carnap's Theory of Descriptions and its Problems. Studia Logica 94 (3):355-380.score: 120.0
    Carnap’s theory of descriptions was restricted in two ways. First, the descriptive conditions had to be non-modal. Second, only primitive predicates or the identity predicate could be used to predicate something of the descriptum . The motivating reasons for these two restrictions that can be found in the literature will be critically discussed. Both restrictions can be relaxed, but Carnap’s theory can still be blamed for not dealing adequately with improper descriptions.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Philipp Koralus (2013). Descriptions, Ambiguity, and Representationalist Theories of Interpretation. Philosophical Studies 162 (2):275-290.score: 118.3
    Abstract Theories of descriptions tend to involve commitments about the ambiguity of descriptions. For example, sentences containing descriptions are widely taken to be ambiguous between de re , de dicto , and intermediate interpretations and are sometimes thought to be ambiguous between the former and directly referential interpretations. I provide arguments to suggest that none of these interpretations are due to ambiguities (or indexicality). On the other hand, I argue that descriptions are ambiguous between the above (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. P. T. Geach (1950). Russell's Theory of Descriptions. Analysis 10 (4):84 - 88.score: 117.0
    The author is critical of russell's theory in that his "analysis of sentences containing definite descriptions is very defective" and has too many complications to serve as a "convention for a symbolic language." (staff).
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Stephen Schiffer (2005). Russell's Theory of Definite Descriptions. Mind 114 (456):1135-1183.score: 116.0
    The proper statement and assessment of Russell's theory depends on one's semantic presuppositions. A semantic framework is provided, and Russell's theory formulated in terms of it. Referential uses of descriptions raise familiar problems for the theory, to which there are, at the most general level of abstraction, two possible Russellian responses. Both are considered, and both found wanting. The paper ends with a brief consideration of what the correct positive theory of definite descriptions might (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Berit Brogaard (2007). Sharvy's Theory of Definite Descriptions Revisited. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 88 (2):160–180.score: 116.0
    The paper revisits Sharvy's theory of plural definite descriptions. An alternative account of plural definite descriptions building on the ideas of plural quantification and non-distributive plural predication is developed. Finally, the alternative is extrapolated to account for generic uses of definite descriptions.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Richard Sharvy (1980). A More General Theory of Definite Descriptions. Philosophical Review 89 (4):607-624.score: 114.0
    A unified theory is offered to account for three types of definite descriptions: with singular, plural, & mass predicates, & to provide an account for the word the in descriptions. It is noted that B. Russell's analysis ("On Denoting," Mind, 1905, 14, 479-493) failed to account for plural & mass descriptions. The proposed theory differs from Russell's only by the substitution of the notation (less than or equal to) for Russell's =. It is suggested that (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Étienne Matheron & Miroslav Zelený (2007). Descriptive Set Theory of Families of Small Sets. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 13 (4):482-537.score: 113.0
    This is a survey paper on the descriptive set theory of hereditary families of closed sets in Polish spaces. Most of the paper is devoted to ideals and σ-ideals of closed or compact sets.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Francesco Pupa (2008). Ambiguous Articles: An Essay On The Theory Of Descriptions. Dissertation, The Graduate Center, CUNYscore: 102.0
    What, from a semantic perspective, is the difference between singular indefinite and definite descriptions? Just over a century ago, Russell provided what has become the standard philosophical response. Descriptions are quantifier phrases, not referring expressions. As such, they differ with respect to the quantities they denote. Indefinite descriptions denote existential quantities; definite descriptions denote uniquely existential quantities. Now around the 1930s and 1940s, some linguists, working independently of philosophers, developed a radically different response. Descriptions, linguists (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Berit Brogaard, Russell's Theory of Descriptions Vs. The Predicative Analysis: A Reply to Graff.score: 102.0
    I. Descriptions in Predicative Position The predicative analysis and Russell’s theory part company when it comes to the argument structure assigned to sentences like (1). (1) Washington is the greatest French soldier. On a standard Russellian analysis, (1) has the following (a) logical form and (b) truth conditions.
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Arkadiusz Chrudzimski (2007). Meinong’s Version of the Description Theory. Russell 27 (1):73-85.score: 102.0
    Around 1904 Meinong formulated his most famous idea: There are no empty (non-referential) singular terms. Each singular term refers to an object. Some of these objects do not exist but all of them enjoy status of Außersein. Russell also did not accept non-referential singular terms. But in his paper “On denoting” (1905) he claimed that all singular terms that are apparently empty could be reinterpreted as apparent singular terms. In short, Meinong expands his universe, while Russell narrows the category of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Jussi Jylkkä (2008). Concepts and Reference: Defending a Dual Theory of Natural Kind Concepts. Dissertation, University of Turkuscore: 99.0
    In this thesis I argue that the psychological study of concepts and categorisation, and the philosophical study of reference are deeply intertwined. I propose that semantic intuitions are a variety of categorisation judgements, determined by concepts, and that because of this, concepts determine reference. I defend a dual theory of natural kind concepts, according to which natural kind concepts have distinct semantic cores and non-semantic identification procedures. Drawing on psychological essentialism, I suggest that the cores consist of externalistic placeholder (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Ian Proops (2006). Soames on the Metaphysics and Epistemology of Moore and Russell. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 129 (3):627–635.score: 99.0
    A critical discussion of selected chapters of the first volume of Scott Soames’s Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century. It is argued that this volume falls short of the minimal standards of scholarship appropriate to a work that advertises itself as a history, and, further, that Soames’s frequent heuristic simplifications and distortions, since they are only sporadically identified as such, are more likely confuse than to enlighten the student. These points are illustrated by reference to Soames’s discussions of Russell’s logical (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Sandrine Gaymard (2013). The Theory of Conditionality: An Illustration of the Place of Norms in the Field of Social Thinking. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 43 (4).score: 98.0
    In the field of the central core theory of social representations, research which has focused on the normative aspects is relatively recent as it dates back little more than ten years. The theory of conditionality which developed from research into the periphery of representation results from this. It is a particularly fruitful theory to explain “normative latitudes” and the behaviour accruing to them. One of the particularities of these works stresses the importance of linking the normative aspects (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Jeff Pelletier, What is Frege's Theory of Descriptions?score: 93.0
    In the case of an actual proper name such as ‘Aristotle’ opinions as to the Sinn may differ. It might, for instance, be taken to be the following: the pupil of Plato and teacher of Alexander the Great. Anybody who does this will attach another Sinn to the sentence ‘Aristotle was born in Stagira’ than will a man who takes as the Sinn of the name: the teacher of Alexander the Great who was born in Stagira. So long as the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. R. K. Perkins (1982). Russell, Frege, and the "Meaning" of the Theory of Descriptions (Or): Did Russell Know His Frege? Journal of the History of Philosophy 20 (4):407-423.score: 93.0
  19. Aloysius Martinich (1983). Sense, Reference, and Russell's Theory of Descriptions. Journal of the History of Philosophy 21 (1):85-91.score: 93.0
  20. Stewart Candlish (2012). The Theory of Descriptions: Russell and the Philosophy of Language. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (4):820-821.score: 93.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Aloysius Martinich (1976). Russell's Theory of Meaning and Descriptions (1905-1920). Journal of the History of Philosophy 14 (2):183-201.score: 93.0
    In several places bertrand russell purports to present an argument proving that definite descriptions have no meaning. There have been several interpretations about what this argument is and whether it is valid. I evaluate these interpretations and then present my own. I argue that russell's argument is defective for turning on an equivocation, Which is camouflaged by amphibolies.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. J. W. Reeves (1933). The Origin and Consequences of the Theory of Descriptions. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 34:211 - 230.score: 93.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Alberto Peruzzi (1988). The Theory of Descriptions Revisited. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 30 (1):91-104.score: 93.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Avrum Stroll (1978). Four Comments on Russell's Theory of Descriptions. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 8 (1):147 - 155.score: 93.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Alan R. White (1959). The 'Meaning' of Russell's Theory of Descriptions. Analysis 20 (1):8 - 9.score: 93.0
    The author holds that "russell confused the idea of meaning which is akin to use and the idea of meaning which is akin to reference, or perhaps denotation." (staff).
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Ted Honderich (1968). On the Theory of Descriptions. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 69:87 - 100.score: 93.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Joy H. Roberts (1976). An Error in Searle's Criticism of Russell's Theory of Descriptions. Southwestern Journal of Philosophy 7 (1):15-19.score: 93.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Max Black (1944). Review: G. E. Moore, Russell's "Theory of Descriptions.". [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 9 (3):78-78.score: 93.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Alonzo Church (1950). Review: P. T. Geach, Russell's Theory of Descriptions. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 15 (3):217-217.score: 93.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Romane Clark (1956). Review: Arthur Pap, Logic, Existence, and the Theory of Descriptions; Donald Kalish, Mr. Pap on Logic, Existence, and Descriptions. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 21 (2):206-206.score: 93.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. William Demopoulos (2007). The 1910 *Principia*'s Theory of Functions and Classes and the Theory of Descriptions. European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 3 (2):159-178.score: 93.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Boguslaw Iwanus (1975). Review: Czeslaw Lejewski, A Re-Examination of the Russellian Theory of Descriptions. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 40 (1):103-104.score: 93.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. David Kaplan (1969). Review: Ronald J. Butler, The Scaffolding of Russell's Theory of Descriptions. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 34 (1):143-143.score: 93.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Marc L. Schnitzer (forthcoming). Presupposition, Entailment, and Russell's Theory of Descriptions. Foundations of Language.score: 93.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Timothy Smiley (2004). The Theory of Descriptions. In T. J. Smiley & Thomas Baldwin (eds.), Studies in the Philosophy of Logic and Knowledge. Published for the British Academy by Oxford University Press. 131--61.score: 93.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Graham Stevens (2009). Anti-Realism and the Theory of Descriptions. In Nicholas Griffin & Dale Jacquette (eds.), Russell Vs. Meinong: The Legacy of "on Denoting". Routledge.score: 93.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Saeid Zibakalam (1997). Relativism Due to a Theory of Natural Rationality. The Research for This Article Was Fully Funded by TAFRESH University, TAFRESH, iRAN, and I Should Therefore Acknowledge Their Kind Support. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 28 (2):337-357.score: 92.0
    Edinburgh School's theory of natural rationality, enunciated to render symmetrical explanation plausible, thereby providing support for its relativism, is presented and evaluated. I have endeavoured to demonstrate that there are gross misinterpretations of Hesse's theory of science, network model, and her conceptions of classification of objects and of universals; that Edinburgh School's theory of natural rationality suffers from a considerable area of ignorance concerning its foundation. I have further shown that not only the theory is not (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Saeid Zibakalam (1997). Relativism Due to a Theory of Natural Rationality. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 28 (2):337 - 357.score: 92.0
    Edinburgh School's theory of natural rationality, enunciated to render symmetrical explanation plausible, thereby providing support for its relativism, is presented and evaluated. I have endeavoured to demonstrate that there are gross misinterpretations of Hesse's theory of science, network model, and her conceptions of classification of objects and of universals; that Edinburgh School's theory of natural rationality suffers from a considerable area of ignorance concerning its foundation. I have further shown that not only the theory is not (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Graham Stevens (2011). The Theory of Descriptions: Russell and the Philosophy of Language. Palgrave Macmillan.score: 92.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Kevin C. Klement (2009). A Cantorian Argument Against Frege's and Early Russell's Theories of Descriptions. In Nicholas Griffin & Dale Jacquette (eds.), Russell Vs. Meinong: The Legacy of "on Denoting". Routledge.score: 90.3
    It would be an understatement to say that Russell was interested in Cantorian diagonal paradoxes. His discovery of the various versions of Russell’s paradox—the classes version, the predicates version, the propositional functions version—had a lasting effect on his views in philosophical logic. Similar Cantorian paradoxes regarding propositions—such as that discussed in §500 of The Principles of Mathematics—were surely among the reasons Russell eventually abandoned his ontology of propositions.1 However, Russell’s reasons for abandoning what he called “denoting concepts”, and his rejection (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Frederick Kroon (2009). Existence in the Theory of Definite Descriptions. Journal of Philosophy 106 (7):365-389.score: 90.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Alex Oliver & Timothy Smiley (2009). Sharvy's Theory of Descriptions: A Paradigm Subverted. Analysis 69 (3):412-421.score: 90.0
  43. Max Rosenkrantz (2005). The Ontological Motivations for the Theory of Descriptions. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (1):114–134.score: 90.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Gideon Makin (1996). Why the Theory of Descriptions? Philosophical Quarterly 46 (183):158-167.score: 90.0
  45. Ian Hacking (1968). A Theory of Indefinite Descriptions with an Application to Probability. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 46 (2):98 – 111.score: 90.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. C. J. F. Williams (1985). Aristotle's Theory of Descriptions. Philosophical Review 94 (1):63-80.score: 90.0
  47. Jaakko Hintikka & Jack Kulas (1982). Russell Vindicated : Towards a General Theory of Definite Descriptions. Journal of Semantics 1 (3-4):387-397.score: 90.0
  48. Charles Crittenden (1970). Ontology and the Theory of Descriptions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 31 (1):85-96.score: 90.0
  49. Ronald J. Butler (1954). The Scaffolding of Russell's Theory of Descriptions. Philosophical Review 63 (3):350-364.score: 90.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Karel Lambert (1962). Notes on E! III: A Theory of Descriptions. Philosophical Studies 13 (4):51--59.score: 90.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000