Russell’s Notion of Scope

Mind 114 (456):1005-1037 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

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

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,718

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Russell's substitutional theory of classes and relations.Gregory Landini - 1987 - History and Philosophy of Logic 8 (2):171-200.
The loss of uniqueness.Szabó Zoltán Gendler - 2005 - Mind 114 (456):1185 - 1222.
Russell's completeness proof.Peter Milne - 2008 - History and Philosophy of Logic 29 (1):31-62.
Particulars As Universals.Herbert Hochberg - 1995 - Journal of Philosophical Research 20:83-111.
Descriptions and beyond.Marga Reimer & Anne Bezuidenhout (eds.) - 2004 - New York: Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
347 (#51,091)

6 months
26 (#94,873)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Saul Kripke
Last affiliation: CUNY Graduate Center

Citations of this work

The Logic of Opacity.Andrew Bacon & Jeffrey Sanford Russell - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 99 (1):81-114.
An Argument For Necessitism.Jeremy Goodman - 2016 - Philosophical Perspectives 30 (1):160-182.
Quantifying In from a Fregean Perspective.Seth Yalcin - 2015 - Philosophical Review 124 (2):207-253.

View all 35 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Frege’s Puzzle (2nd edition).Nathan U. Salmon - 1986 - Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview Publishing Company.
On Denoting.Bertrand Russell - 1905 - Mind 14 (56):479-493.
Reference and definite descriptions.Keith S. Donnellan - 1966 - Philosophical Review 75 (3):281-304.
Uber Sinn und Bedeutung.Gottlob Frege - 1892 - Zeitschrift für Philosophie Und Philosophische Kritik 100 (1):25-50.

View all 56 references / Add more references