Russell’s Leibnizian Concept of Vagueness

History of Philosophy Quarterly 28 (3):289-301 (2011)

Authors
Larry M. Jorgensen
Skidmore College
Abstract
The account of vagueness Bertrand Russell provided in his 1923 paper, entitled simply “Vagueness” (see Russell [1923]1997), has been thought by some to be inconsistent. One main objection, raised by Timothy Williamson (1994), is that Russell’s attempt early in the paper to distinguish vagueness from generality is at odds with the definition of vagueness he presents later in the same paper. It is as if, as Williamson puts it, Russell “backslides” from his previous distinction (1994, 60), resulting in a conflation of generality and vagueness that is at best problematic for a rigorous account of the phenomenon of vagueness. In this paper, I will defend Russell from this particular objection. While his 1923 paper may not be as clear at various points as one might hope, I do believe it is possible to construct a single theory of vagueness that can be applied equally well to his earlier and later discussions. Thus, Russell’s view is not ultimately inconsistent. In this paper, I will first present the interpretation of Russell’s concept of vagueness that falls prey to the charge of conflating vagueness and generality. Once the problem is clear, I will present an alternative interpretation, one that arises from certain reflections on G. W. Leibniz’s theory of perception. This Leibnizian interpretation of Russell, I will argue, resolves the apparent contradiction in Russell’s account of vagueness.
Keywords Leibniz  Russell  Vagueness
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 60,949
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Vagueness.Timothy Williamson - 1994 - Routledge.
Vagueness.Loretta Torrago - 1998 - Philosophical Review 107 (4):637.
Leibnizian Expression.Ch Swoyer - 1995 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 33 (1):65-99.
Leibniz and Degrees of Perception.Robert Brandom - 1981 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 19 (4):447-479.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Russell's Theses on Vagueness.Bertil RolF - 1982 - History and Philosophy of Logic 3 (1):69-83.
Russell on Metaphysical Vagueness.Mark Colyvan - 2001 - Principia 5 (1-2):87-98.
Varieties of Vagueness.Trenton Merricks - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 62 (1):145-157.
Russell on Vagueness.Robert Barnard - 1997 - Bertrand Russell Society Quarterly 95 (1):8--11.
Horgan on Vagueness.Timothy Williamson - 2002 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 63 (1):273-285.
Vagueness.Achille C. Varzi - 2003 - In Lynn Nadel (ed.), Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science, Vol. 4. Nature Publishing Group. pp. 459–464.
Vagueness: Subvaluationism.Pablo Cobreros - 2013 - Philosophy Compass 8 (5):472-485.
Vagueness : A Statistical Epistemicist Approach.Jiri Benovsky - 2011 - Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy (3):97-112.
The Problem with Truthmaker-Gap Epistemicism.Mark Jago - 2012 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 1 (4):320-329.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-10-10

Total views
43 ( #243,338 of 2,439,332 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #209,317 of 2,439,332 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes