Denoting Concepts and Ontology in Russell's Principles of Mathematics
Bertrand Russell’s Principles of Mathematics (1903) gives rise to several interpretational challenges, especially concerning the theory of denoting concepts. Only relatively recently, for instance, has it been properly realised that Russell accepted denoting concepts that do not denote anything. Such empty denoting concepts are sometimes thought to enable Russell, whether he was aware of it or not, to avoid commitment to some of the problematic non-existent entities he seems to accept, such as the Homeric gods and chimeras. In this paper, I argue first that the theory of denoting concepts in Principles of Mathematics has been generally misunderstood. According to the interpretation I defend, if a denoting concept shifts what a proposition is about, then the aggregate of the denoted terms will also be a constituent of the proposition. I then show that Russell therefore could not have avoided commitment to the Homeric gods and chimeras by appealing to empty denoting concepts. Finally, I develop what I think is the best understanding of the ontology of Principles of Mathematics by interpreting some difficult passages.
Ayer, A. J., 1971. Russell and Moore: The Analytical Heritage. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Blackwell, Kenneth, 1984. “Part I of The Principles of Mathematics.” Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 4: 271–88.
Bostock, David, 2009. “Russell’s Early Theory of Denoting.” History and Philosophy of Logic 30: 49–67.
Byrd, Michael, 1987. “Part II of The Principles of Mathematics.” Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 7: 60–70.
———, 1994. “Part V of The Principles of Mathematics.” Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 14: 47–86.
———, 1996. “Parts III–IV of The Principles of Mathematics.” Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 16: 145–86.
———, 1999a. “Part VI of The Principles of Mathematics.” Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 19: 29–61.
———, 1999b. “Part VII of The Principles of Mathematics.” Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 19: 143–74.
Candlish, Stewart, 2007. The Russell/Bradley Dispute and its Significance for Twentieth-Century Philosophy. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dau, Paolo, 1986. “Russell’s First Theory of Denoting and Quantification.” Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 30: 343–61.
Grattan-Guinness, Ivor, 1996. “How Did Russell Write The Principles of Mathematics (1903)?” Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 16: 147–53.
Griffin, Nicholas, 1980. “Russell on the Nature of Logic (1903–1913).” Synthese 45: 117–88.
———, 1996. “Denoting Concepts in The Principles of Mathematics.” In Ray Monk and Anthony Palmer (1996), pp. 23–64.
Hylton, Peter, 1984. “The Nature of the Proposition and the Revolt Against Idealism.” In Philosophy in History, edited by Richard Rorty, Jerome B. Schneewind and Quentin Skinner, pp. 375–97. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
———, 1990. Russell, Idealism and the Emergence of Analytic Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
———, 2003. “The Theory of Descriptions.” In The Cambridge Companion to Bertrand Russell, edited by Nicholas Griffin, pp. 202–40. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jager, Ronald, 1972. The Development of Russell’s Philosophy. London: Allen and Unwin.
Klement, Kevin, 2014. “Early Russell on Types and Plurals.” Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 2(6): 1–21.
Levine, James, 1998. “Acquaintance, Denoting Concepts, and Sense.” Philosophical Review 107(3): 415–45.
Makin, Gideon, 2000. The Metaphysicians of Meaning: Russell and Frege on Sense and Denotation. London: Routledge.
Ray Monk and Anthony Palmer, eds., 1996. Bertrand Russell and the Origins of Analytical Philosophy. Bristol: Thoemmes Press.
Moore, G. E., 1898. “The Nature of Judgment.” Mind 8: 176–93.
Noonan, Harold, 1996. “Denoting Concepts in The Principles of Mathematics.” In Ray Monk and Anthony Palmer (1996), pp. 65–102.
Oliver, Alex and Timothy Smiley, 2016. Plural Logic, Second edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pears, D. F., 1967. Bertrand Russell and the British Tradition in Philosophy. London: Collins.
Quine, W. V., 1966. “Russell’s Ontological Development.” Journal of Philosophy 63: 657–67.
Rauti, Antonio, 2004. “Propositional Structure and B. Russell’s Theory of Denoting in The Principles of Mathematics.” History and Philosophy of Logic 25: 281–304.
Russell, Bertrand, 1903a. “Dependent Variables and Denotation.” In Russell (1994), pp. 297–304.
———, 1903b. “On Meaning and Denotation.” In Russell (1994), pp. 314–58.
———, 1903c. “On the Meaning and Denotation of Phrases.” In Russell (1994), pp. 283–96.
———, 1903d. “Points about Denoting.” In Russell (1994), pp. 305–13.
———, 1903e. Principles of Mathematics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
———, 1905a. “On Denoting.” Mind 14: 479–93.
———, 1905b. “On Fundamentals.” In Russell (1994), pp. 359–413.
———, 1905c. “The Existential Import of Propositions.” Mind 14: 398–401.
———, 1959. My Philosophical Development. London: Allen and Unwin.
———, 1994. The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, vol. 4: Foundations of Logic 1903–1905, edited by Alasdair Urquhart. London: Routledge.
———, 2004 (1928). Sceptical Essays. London: Routledge Classics.
Stevens, Graham, 2011. The Theory of Descriptions: Russell and the Philosophy of Language. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
The Public Knowledge Project recommends the use of the Creative Commons license. The Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy requires authors to agree to a Creative Commons Attribution /Non-commercial license. Authors who publish with the Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons BY-NC license.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.