11 found
Order:
Disambiguations
R. K. Perkins [9]R. K. Perkins Jr [2]
  1.  56
    McHarry's Theodicy: A Reply.R. K. Perkins - 1980 - Analysis 40 (3):168 - 171.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  2.  61
    Urmson on Russell's Incomplete Symbols.R. K. Perkins - 1972 - Analysis 32 (6):200 - 203.
    J. o. urmson's contention that russell held that 'to show that 'x' is an incomplete symbol is tantamount to showing that there are no x's' is shown to rest partly upon a misreading of "principia", pp. 71-72, where russell reveals what he means by a 'definite proof' that a symbol is incomplete, and partly upon a misunderstanding of russell's use of the expression 'logical fiction'.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  42
    Incomplete Symbols Again: A Reply To Mr Urmson.R. K. Perkins - 1974 - Analysis 35 (October):29-31.
    Urmson is correct in holding that russell's use of "logical fiction" does usually involve ontological implications. But the issue is more complex than he seems to realize. Because russell's program of logical construction is revisionary, The question "are there really x's?" is ambiguous and can be taken as asking either: (a) are there x's as thought of pre-Analytically? or (b) are there x's as thought of post-Analytically? russell gives different answers in each case.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4.  11
    On Russell's Alleged Confusion of Sense and Reference.R. K. Perkins - 1971 - Analysis 32 (2):45 - 51.
  5.  7
    An Atheistic Argument From the Improvability of the Universe.R. K. Perkins Jr - 1983 - Noûs 17 (2):239-250.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  6.  12
    Russell on Memory.R. K. Perkins Jr - 1973 - Mind 82 (328):600-601.
    The article attempts to settle a controversy between d f pears and j o urmson over the nature of russell's early theory of memory. it is shown that contrary to what pears claims in his "bertrand russell and the british tradition in philosophy," russell had explicitly abandoned a realist account of memory by 1915. the article sides with urmson as against pears, but apparently both have overlooked two of russell's little noticed 1915 papers in the "monist.".
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  7.  33
    Russell, Frege, and the "Meaning" of the Theory of Descriptions (Or): Did Russell Know His Frege?R. K. Perkins - 1982 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 20 (4):407-423.
  8.  8
    Russell's Realist Theory of Remote Memory.R. K. Perkins - 1976 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 14 (3):358-360.
  9. Incomplete Symbols Again: A Reply to Mr. Urmson.R. K. Perkins - 1974 - Analysis 35 (1):29.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Russell's Unpublished Book on Theory of Knowledge.R. K. Perkins - 1979 - Russell: The Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 35:37.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. Urmson on Russell's incomplete symbols.R. K. Perkins - 1972 - Erkenntnis 32 (6):200.
    No categories
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography