The extent of Russell's modal views

Erkenntnis 34 (2):171 - 185 (1991)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Russell has recently been held to have had a modal logic, a full modal theory and a view of naming that anticipates Kripke's intuitions on rigid designation. It is argued here that no such claims are warranted. While Russell was not altogether silent on matters modal, he did not advance an identifiable modal logic or anything more than a modest modal theory. His view of naming involves a notion of guaranteed reference. But what Kripke's intuitions about rigidity primarily pertain to is fixed reference, something demonstrably different.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,408

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Can modal intuitions be evidence for essentialist claims?Janet Levin - 2007 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 50 (3):253 – 269.
Russell's paradox of the totality of propositions.Nino B. Cocchiarella - 2000 - Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 5 (1):25-37.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
30 (#452,445)

6 months
1 (#1,005,371)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Ways of understanding Hugh MacColl's concept of symbolic existence.Shahid Rahman - 1998 - Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 3:35-58.
Russell and MacColl: Reply to Grattan-guinness, wolen ski, and read.Modal Logic - 2001 - Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 6 (1):21-42.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references