Canadian Journal of Philosophy 10 (4):587-592 (1980)
AbstractOften Bertrand Russell defends his view that names differ from descriptions in that names have meaning but descriptions do not by using a “proof.” Recently in this journal it has been debated whether Russell's “proof” fails or not. The familiar objection to Russell's argument is that it is circular or it involves a sense/reference equivocation. Avrum Stroll suggests a novel criticism by making use of a “mirror argument“ which attempts to show that Russell's argument can be used to conclude that "Scott" has no meaning, and that thus the argument proves too much or nothing. Robert Fahrnkopf defends Russell's argument, but, I believe, he does not go far enough in his defense. So it will be useful to carry this debate a few steps further.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Similar books and articles
11. Aquinas on the Ultimate End of Human Existence.Russel Pannier - 2000 - Logos. Anales Del Seminario de Metafísica [Universidad Complutense de Madrid, España] 3 (4).
Civil Liberties and the Antislavery Controversy.Russel B. Nye - 1945 - Science and Society 9 (2):125 - 146.
Russel ante el inicio de la Matemática.Javier de Lorenzo - 1972 - Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 8 (4):45-53.
Introduction.Russel D. Legge & Stephen A. Jones - 1989 - Journal of Business Ethics 8 (2-3):91 - 93.
Misunderstanding the Myth in the Gorgias.Daniel C. Russel - 2001 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 39 (4):557-573.
Matthew’s ‘Undercurrent’ and Ogden’s Christology.Russel Pregeant - 1976 - Process Studies 6 (3):181-194.
An Answer for Agnostics. By Russel J. Clinchy.Robert C. Whittemore - 1968 - Modern Schoolman 45 (2):167-167.
The Ageing Pineal Gland and its Physiological Consequences.Russel J. Reiter - 1992 - Bioessays 14 (3):169-175.