According to the received view, Russell moved from his 1903-1904 theory of definite descriptions to his 1905 theory because he wanted to free himself from the earlier theory’s manifest ontological committment to Meinong-like nonexistent entities. Yet this view is not convincing. For the two theories basically have the same committments. The real theoretical motive for this change is that Russell wanted to dispense with the notion of a denoting concept. For this notion prompts the earlier theory to endorse a hidden Meinongian ontological committment whose semantical consequences are devastating. At least in part, this theoretical motive can be textually grounded.
Russell e l’abbandono del suo meinonghianesimo nascosto
VOLTOLINI, Alberto
2006-01-01
Abstract
According to the received view, Russell moved from his 1903-1904 theory of definite descriptions to his 1905 theory because he wanted to free himself from the earlier theory’s manifest ontological committment to Meinong-like nonexistent entities. Yet this view is not convincing. For the two theories basically have the same committments. The real theoretical motive for this change is that Russell wanted to dispense with the notion of a denoting concept. For this notion prompts the earlier theory to endorse a hidden Meinongian ontological committment whose semantical consequences are devastating. At least in part, this theoretical motive can be textually grounded.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
