Philosophical Studies 139 (2):209-212 (2008)

Michael Kremer
University of Chicago
In "What is History For?," Scott Soames responds to criticisms of his treatment of Russell's logic in volume 1 of his "Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century." This note rebuts two of Soames's replies, showing that a first-order presentation of Russell's logic does not fit the argument of the "Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy," and that Soames's contextual definition of classes does not match Russell's contextual definition of classes. In consequence, Soames's presentation of Russell's logic misrepresents what Russell took to be its technical achievement and its philosophical significance.
Keywords Philosophy   Philosophy of Religion   Philosophy of Mind   Epistemology   Logic   Philosophy
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11098-007-9113-0
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,114
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Principia Mathematica.A. N. Whitehead - 1926 - Mind 35 (137):130.
Logic and Knowledge: Essays 1901-1950.Bertrand Russell - 1956 - London, England: Macmillan.
What is History For? Reply to Critics of The Dawn of Analysis.S. Soames - 2006 - Philosophical Studies 129 (3):645-665.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Functions of Russell’s No Class Theory.Kevin C. Klement - 2010 - Review of Symbolic Logic 3 (4):633-664.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Propositions and Attitudes.Nathan U. Salmon & Scott Soames (eds.) - 1988 - Oxford University Press.
The Functions of Russell’s No Class Theory.Kevin C. Klement - 2010 - Review of Symbolic Logic 3 (4):633-664.
Russell and MacColl: Reply to Grattan-Guinness, Wolen Ski, and Read.Modal Logic - 2001 - Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 6 (1):21-42.
Dewey's New Logic: A Reply to Russell.Tom Burke - 1998 - University of Chicago Press.
Reply to Critics.S. Soames - 2006 - Philosophical Studies 128 (3):711-738.
Dewey's New Logic: A Reply to Russell.Tom Burke - 1994 - Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.


Added to PP index

Total views
43 ( #261,209 of 2,499,060 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #419,059 of 2,499,060 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes