Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy https://jhaponline.org/jhap <p>JHAP aims to promote research in and discussion of the history of analytical philosophy. <a href="/jhap/about">Read more ...</a></p> McMaster University en-US Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 2159-0303 <p>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 <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution /Non-commercial license</a>. Authors who publish with the Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy agree to the following terms:</p> <ol> <li class="show">Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/">Creative Commons BY-NC license</a>.</li> <li class="show">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.</li> <li class="show">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)</li> </ol> <p><a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/" rel="license"><img style="border-width: 0;" src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc/3.0/88x31.png" alt="Creative Commons License"></a><br>This work is licensed under a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/" rel="license">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License</a>.</p> Denoting Concepts and Ontology in Russell's Principles of Mathematics https://jhaponline.org/jhap/article/view/5021 <p>Bertrand Russell’s <em>Principles of Mathematics</em> (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 <em>Principles of </em><em>Mathematics</em> 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 <em>Principles of </em><em>Mathematics</em> by interpreting some difficult passages.</p> Wouter Adriaan Cohen Copyright (c) 2022 Wouter Cohen 2022-09-08 2022-09-08 10 7 10.15173/jhap.v10i7.5021