Topics
RussellPerson
A consequence of Russell's Theory of Descriptions is that non-indicative sentences (questions and imperatives) either have meanings that are obviously distinct from their actual meanings, even after all pragmatic and contextual variables are allowed for, or are categorically non-sensical. Therefore, the Theory of Descriptions is false
Is the definite article analyzed by Russell’s Theory of Definite Descriptions identical to the defin...
All too often when philosophers talk and write about sentences they have in mind only indicative sen...
In order to understand a sentence, one must know the relevant semantic rules. Those rules are not le...
A consequence of Russell's Theory of Descriptions is that non-indicative sentences (questions and im...
This paper shows that Russell’s theory of descriptions gives the wrong se-mantics for definite descr...
This paper shows that Russell’s theory of descriptions gives the wrong semantics for definite descri...
For Russell, a simple sentence containing a description, the F, is true only if a single object sa...
Previous theorists have claimed that Russell’s theory of definite descriptions gives the wrong truth...
The topic of this paper is the logical analysis and translation of definite descriptions (structures...
Russell argued, famously, that definite descriptions are not logical constituents of the sentences i...
I contend that alongside the official analysis of sentences containing defi-nite descriptions propos...
On a popular view dating back to Russell, descriptions, both definite and indefinite alike, work syn...
In this paper I revisit the main arguments for a predicate analysis of descriptions in order to dete...
Despite its enormous popularity, Russell’s theory of definite descriptions has received various crit...
A Russellian theory of (definite) descriptions takes an utterance of the form 'The F is G' to expres...
Is the definite article analyzed by Russell’s Theory of Definite Descriptions identical to the defin...
All too often when philosophers talk and write about sentences they have in mind only indicative sen...
In order to understand a sentence, one must know the relevant semantic rules. Those rules are not le...
A consequence of Russell's Theory of Descriptions is that non-indicative sentences (questions and im...
This paper shows that Russell’s theory of descriptions gives the wrong se-mantics for definite descr...
This paper shows that Russell’s theory of descriptions gives the wrong semantics for definite descri...
For Russell, a simple sentence containing a description, the F, is true only if a single object sa...
Previous theorists have claimed that Russell’s theory of definite descriptions gives the wrong truth...
The topic of this paper is the logical analysis and translation of definite descriptions (structures...
Russell argued, famously, that definite descriptions are not logical constituents of the sentences i...
I contend that alongside the official analysis of sentences containing defi-nite descriptions propos...
On a popular view dating back to Russell, descriptions, both definite and indefinite alike, work syn...
In this paper I revisit the main arguments for a predicate analysis of descriptions in order to dete...
Despite its enormous popularity, Russell’s theory of definite descriptions has received various crit...
A Russellian theory of (definite) descriptions takes an utterance of the form 'The F is G' to expres...
Is the definite article analyzed by Russell’s Theory of Definite Descriptions identical to the defin...
All too often when philosophers talk and write about sentences they have in mind only indicative sen...
In order to understand a sentence, one must know the relevant semantic rules. Those rules are not le...
Add to ORKG