Russell's theory of definite descriptions

Mind 114 (456):1135-1183 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The proper statement and assessment of Russell's theory depends on one's semantic presuppositions. A semantic framework is provided, and Russell's theory formulated in terms of it. Referential uses of descriptions raise familiar problems for the theory, to which there are, at the most general level of abstraction, two possible Russellian responses. Both are considered, and both found wanting. The paper ends with a brief consideration of what the correct positive theory of definite descriptions might be, if it is not the Russellian theory.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 106,211

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
286 (#102,393)

6 months
25 (#132,405)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Stephen Schiffer
New York University

References found in this work

The Varieties of Reference.Gareth Evans - 1982 - Oxford: Oxford University Press. Edited by John Henry McDowell.
Convention: A Philosophical Study.David Kellogg Lewis - 1969 - Cambridge, MA, USA: Wiley-Blackwell.
On Denoting.Bertrand Russell - 1905 - Mind 14 (56):479-493.
Meaning.Herbert Paul Grice - 1957 - Philosophical Review 66 (3):377-388.
Reference and definite descriptions.Keith S. Donnellan - 1966 - Philosophical Review 75 (3):281-304.

View all 27 references / Add more references