Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T11:30:54.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interpreting Russell’s Gray’s Elegy Argument

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 May 2013

NICHOLAS RAY
NICHOLAS RAY*
Affiliation:
University of Waterloo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

“On Denoting” is central to the analytic tradition, yet one of its key arguments (the Gray’s Elegy Argument) lacks a canonical reading. Some interpret the passage as rejecting denoting concepts as inconsistent, or the theory that posits them as incoherent. Such readings are too strong, and at odds with the passage. We interpret the argument as a set of considerations that leave the old view as a logically viable (though uneconomical and cumbersome) competitor to Russell’s new semantic theory.

«De la Dénotation» est l’un des articles les plus importants de la tradition analytique, pourtant il n’existe pas d’interprétation canonique pour l’un de ses argument-clés (l’argument de l’Élégie de Gray). Certains croient que le passage en question démontre que les concepts dénotants en eux-mêmes sont contradictoires; d’autres que la théorie qui les sous-tend est incohérente. Les deux interprétations sont trop fortes et sont contredites par le texte du passage. Nous l’interprétons plutôt comme un ensemble de considérations qui conservent à l’ancienne théorie, bien qu’elle soit encombrante et prolixe, la possibilité de concurrencer la nouvelle presentation sémantique de Russell.

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 51 , Issue 4 , December 2012 , pp. 667 - 682
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blackburn, Simon and Code, Alan 1978 “The Power of Russell’s Criticism of Frege.” Analysis 38, pp. 65–77.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Richard 1987 “On the Origins of Russell’s Theory of Descriptions.” In Cartwright, R., Philosophical Essays. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 95–133.Google Scholar
Demopoulos, William 1999 “On the theory of meaning of ‘On denoting’.” Noûs 33:3, pp. 439–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geach, Peter 1959 “Russell on Meaning and Denoting.” Analysis 19, pp. 69–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hylton, Peter 1990 Russell, Idealism, and the Emergence of Analytic Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kremer, Michael 1994 “The Argument of ‘On Denoting’.” The Philosophical Review, vol. 103, no. 2, pp. 249–297.Google Scholar
Makin, Gideon 2000 The Metaphysicians of Meaning: Russell and Frege on Sense and Denotation. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moore, G.E. 1899 “The Nature of Judgment.” Mind, pp. 176–193.Google Scholar
Noonan, Harold 1996 “The ‘Gray’s Elegy’ Argument – And Others.” in Bertrand Russell and the Origins of Analytic Philosophy, edited by Monk, Ray and Palmer, Anthony. Bristol, UK: Thoemmes Press, pp. 65–102.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand 1903 The Principles of Mathematics. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand 1904 “Letter to Frege of 12 December 1904.” in Gottlob Frege, Philosophical and Mathematical Correspondence, Trans. Kaal, Hans. Oxford: Blackwell, 1980, p. 169.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand 1905 “On Denoting.” in Bertrand Russell (2005), pp. 41–56.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand 1912 The Problems of Philosophy. Galaxy Book reprint of the Home University Library edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand 1994 “On Fundamentals.” in Foundations of Logic, 1903–05. The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, Vol. 4. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand 2005 Logic and Knowledge: Essays 1901–1950. edited by Marsh, Robert Charles. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wahl, Russell 1993 “Russell’s Theory of Meaning and Denotation and ‘On Denoting’” in Journal of the History of Philosophy, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 71–94.Google Scholar