DOCSLIB.ORG

The Cambridge Companion to BERTRAND RUSSELL

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Cambridge Companion to BERTRAND RUSSELL the cambridge companion to BERTRAND RUSSELL Each volume in this series of companions to major philosophers contains specially commissioned essays by an international team of scholars, together with a substantial bibliography, and will serve as a reference work for students and non-specialists. One aim of the series is to dispel the in- timidation such readers often feel when faced with the work of a difficult and challenging thinker. Bertrand Russell ranks as one of the giants of twentieth- century philosophy. Through his books, journalism, corre- spondence, and political activity he exerted a profound in- fluence on modern thought. This companion centers on Russell’s contributions to modern philosophy and, therefore, concentrates on the early part of his career. There are chap- ters on Russell’s contributions to the foundations of math- ematics and on his development of new logical methods in philosophy and their application to such fields as epistemol- ogy, metaphysics, and the philosophy of language. The intel- lectual background to his work is covered, as is his engage- ment with such contemporaries as Frege and G. E. Moore. The final chapter considers Russell as a moral philosopher. New readers will find this the most convenient and acces- sible guide to Russell available. Advanced students and spe- cialists will find a conspectus of recent developments in the interpretation of Russell. Nicholas Griffin is Canada Research Chair in Philosophy and Director of the Bertrand Russell Research Centre, McMaster University. other volumes in the series of cambridge companions: AQUINAS Edited by norman kretzmann and eleonore stump HANNAH ARENDT Edited by dana villa ARISTOTLE Edited by jonathan barnes AUGUSTINE Edited by eleonore stump and norman kretzmann BACON Edited by markku peltonen DESCARTES Edited by john cottingham DUNS SCOTUS Edited by thomas williams EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY Edited by a. a. long FEMINISM IN PHILOSOPHY Edited by miranda fricker and jennifer hornsby FOUCAULT Edited by gary gutting FREUD Edited by jerome neu GADAMER Edited by robert dostal GALILEO Edited by peter machamer GERMAN IDEALISM Edited by karl ameriks HABERMAS Edited by stephen k. white HEGEL Edited by frederick beiser HEIDEGGER Edited by charles guignon HOBBES Edited by tom sorell HUME Edited by david fate norton HUSSERL Edited by barry smith and david woodruff smith WILLIAM JAMES Edited by ruth anna putnam KANT Edited by paul guyer KIERKEGAARD Edited by alastair hannay and gordon marino LEIBNIZ Edited by nicholas jolley LOCKE Edited by vere chappell MALEBRANCHE Edited by stephen nadler MARX Edited by terrell carver MILL Edited by john skorupski NEWTON Edited by i. bernard cohen and george e. smith NIETZSCHE Edited by bernd magnus and kathleen higgins OCKHAM Edited by paul vincent spade PLATO Edited by richard kraut PLOTINUS Edited by lloyd p. gerson RAWLS Edited by samuel freeman ROUSSEAU Edited by patrick riley SARTRE Edited by christina howells SCHOPENHAUER Edited by christopher janaway SPINOZA Edited by don garrett THE STOICS Edited by brad inwood WITTGENSTEIN Edited by hans sluga and david stern The Cambridge Companion to BERTRAND RUSSELL Edited by Nicholas Griffin McMaster University Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge , United Kingdom Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521631785 © Cambridge University Press 2003 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provision of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published in print format 2003 - ---- eBook (NetLibrary) - --- eBook (NetLibrary) - ---- hardback - --- hardback - ---- paperback - --- paperback Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of s for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this book, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. contents Acknowledgments page ix List of Abbreviations Used in Citations xi List of Contributors xv Introduction 1 nicholas griffin 1 Mathematics in and behind Russell’s Logicism, and Its Reception 51 i. grattan-guinness 2 Russell’s Philosophical Background 84 nicholas griffin 3 Russell and Moore, 1898–1905 108 richard l. cartwright 4 Russell and Frege 128 michael beaney 5 Bertrand Russell’s Logicism 171 martin godwyn and andrew d. irvine 6 The Theory of Descriptions 202 peter hylton 7 Russell’s Substitutional Theory 241 gregory landini 8 The Theory of Types 286 alasdair urquhart vii viii contents 9 Russell’s Method of Analysis 310 paul hager 10 Russell’s Neutral Monism 332 r.e. tully 11 The Metaphysics of Logical Atomism 371 bernard linsky 12 Russell’s Structuralism and the Absolute Description of the World 392 william demopoulos 13 From Knowledge by Acquaintance to Knowledge by Causation 420 thomas baldwin 14 Russell, Experience, and the Roots of Science 449 a.c. grayling 15 Bertrand Russell: Moral Philosopher or Unphilosophical Moralist? 475 charles r. pigden Selective Bibliography 507 Index 541 acknowledgments I am very grateful to my contributors and their patience in what proved to be a much more time-consuming exercise than any of us anticipated. I benefited from discussing many of the papers in the volume with David Godden. For help with the references and bibli- ography I am grateful to Alison Roberts Miculan, Elizabeth Skakoon, Michael Potter, and Sarah Shulist. Financial support for my research was provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Coun- cil of Canada. ix list of abbreviations used in citations In this book, like many others on Russell, abbreviations have been used to identify his most frequently cited works. The list below iden- tifies not only the work but also the edition cited in this volume (in the case of books, generally the first British edition). In the case of The Problems of Philosophy, however, there are a number of printings with different paginations, and references here are given to both the first British edition and to a widely available reprint, the pagination of which is shared by a number of other reprints. Principia Mathe- matica poses different problems: a new introduction and several new appendices, representing a different philosophical point of view, were added for the second edition of 1925–7. These major changes did not affect the pagination of the original. Nonetheless, pagination was al- tered as a result of the first two volumes being reset. The first edition is extremely rare and the second is, in any case, preferable since the resetting allowed misprints to be corrected. Accordingly, whenever Principia is cited, the reference is to the second edition; but when material is referred to which is only to be found in the second edition, the citation is to ‘PM2’ rather than to ‘PM’. The use of acronyms is much more selective in the case of Russell’s articles. Wherever possible, the definitive version of the text as es- tablished in The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell is cited. Some contributors to the volume cited other widely used editions. In such cases, the original citations have been kept and citations to the Col- lected Papers added. The volumes of the Collected Papers cited in this book are as follows: Papers 1: Cambridge Essays: 1888–99. Edited by Kenneth Black- well, Andrew Brink, Nicholas Griffin, Richard A. Rempel, and John G. Slater. London: Allen and Unwin, 1983. xi xii list of abbreviations used in citations Papers 2: Philosophical Papers: 1896–99. Edited by Nicholas Griffin and Albert C. Lewis. London: Unwin Hyman, 1990. Papers 3: Towards the ‘Principles of Mathematics’, 1900–2. Edited by Gregory H. Moore. London: Routledge, 1993. Papers 4: Foundations of Logic, 1903–5. Edited by Alasdair Urquhart. London: Routledge, 1994. Papers 6: Logical and Philosophical Papers, 1909–13. Edited by John G. Slater. London: Routledge, 1992. Papers 7: Theory of Knowledge: The 1913 Manuscript. Edited by Elizabeth Ramsden Eames and Kenneth Blackwell. London: Allen and Unwin, 1984. Papers 8: The Philosophy of Logical Atomism and Other Essays: 1914–19. Edited by John G. Slater. London: Allen and Unwin, 1986. Papers 9: Essays on Language, Mind, and Matter: 1919–26. Edited by John G. Slater. London: Unwin Hyman, 1988. Papers 10: A Fresh Look at Empiricism: 1927–42. Edited by John G. Slater. London: Routledge, 1996. Papers 11: Last Philosophical Testament: 1943–68. Edited by John G. Slater. London: Routledge, 1997. Papers 28: Man’s Peril 1954–5. Edited by Andrew G. Bone. London: Routledge, 2003. Other works by Russell are cited as follows: Auto The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell 3 vols. (London: Allen and Unwin, 1967–9). AMa The Analysis of Matter (London: Kegan Paul, 1927). AMi The Analysis of Mind (London: Allen and Unwin, 1921). AMR ‘An Analysis of Mathematical Reasoning’ (1898), in Papers 2, pp. 154–242. EA Essays in Analysis. Edited by Douglas Lackey (London: Allen and Unwin, 1974). EFG An Essay on the Foundations of Geometry (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1897; New York: Dover, 1956). HK Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits (London: Allen and Unwin, 1984). HWP History of Western Philosophy (London: Allen and Unwin, 1946). list of abbreviations used in citations xiii HSEP Human Society in Ethics and Politics (London: Allen and Unwin, 1954). IMP Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy (London: Allen and Unwin, 1919). IMT Inquiry into Meaning and Truth (London: Allen and Unwin, 1940). KAKD ‘Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by De- scription’ (1911), in Papers 6, pp. 147–61. LA ‘Logical Atomism’ (1924), in Papers 9, pp. 160–79; and LK, pp. 323–43. LK Logic and Knowledge. Edited by R.C. Marsh (London: Allen and Unwin, 1956). ML Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays (London: Long- mans Green, 1918).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Development of Mathematical Logic from Russell to Tarski: 1900–1935
    The Development of Mathematical Logic from Russell to Tarski: 1900–1935 Paolo Mancosu Richard Zach Calixto Badesa The Development of Mathematical Logic from Russell to Tarski: 1900–1935 Paolo Mancosu (University of California, Berkeley) Richard Zach (University of Calgary) Calixto Badesa (Universitat de Barcelona) Final Draft—May 2004 To appear in: Leila Haaparanta, ed., The Development of Modern Logic. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004 Contents Contents i Introduction 1 1 Itinerary I: Metatheoretical Properties of Axiomatic Systems 3 1.1 Introduction . 3 1.2 Peano’s school on the logical structure of theories . 4 1.3 Hilbert on axiomatization . 8 1.4 Completeness and categoricity in the work of Veblen and Huntington . 10 1.5 Truth in a structure . 12 2 Itinerary II: Bertrand Russell’s Mathematical Logic 15 2.1 From the Paris congress to the Principles of Mathematics 1900–1903 . 15 2.2 Russell and Poincar´e on predicativity . 19 2.3 On Denoting . 21 2.4 Russell’s ramified type theory . 22 2.5 The logic of Principia ......................... 25 2.6 Further developments . 26 3 Itinerary III: Zermelo’s Axiomatization of Set Theory and Re- lated Foundational Issues 29 3.1 The debate on the axiom of choice . 29 3.2 Zermelo’s axiomatization of set theory . 32 3.3 The discussion on the notion of “definit” . 35 3.4 Metatheoretical studies of Zermelo’s axiomatization . 38 4 Itinerary IV: The Theory of Relatives and Lowenheim’s¨ Theorem 41 4.1 Theory of relatives and model theory . 41 4.2 The logic of relatives .
    [Show full text]
  • Russell and Philip Jourdain a Study of Their Relationship
    Russell and Philip Jourdain a study of their relationship One of the frustrations of Russellian scholarship is that there is often no trace among his papers of the letters he wrote Defore 1952 to his many correspondents. One of the most important missions of the Bertrand Russell Archives is to find as many of these letters as possible; for whenever some are found, new insights and detail s emerge. Without denying the central importance of the papers purchased from Russell in 1968, the most exciting development may be the growth of its section of recent acquisitions from 'other sources. A collection of letters of this type which is of unique importance is the surviving correspondence between Russell and the mathematician and historian of mathematics Philip Jourdain (1879-1919}. Jourdain suffered throughout his life from FriedriCh's ataxia, a crippling palsey which made writing extremely difficult for him. l Nevertheless he successfully pursued a career in research and scholarship. Indeed, all his brothers and sisters were remarkable in one way or another. For example, his eldest sister Eleanor was Vice-Principal of st. Hugh's College, Oxford (and Russell knew her quite we].l in the years when he lived in the city), and in 1911 she and her Principal Annie Moberley caused a sensation when they published pseudonymously a book claiming that in 1901 they had seen Marie Antoinette and members of her court during a visit to Versailles. 2 Philip had strong views, especially in favour of foundational studies in mathematics and against the church, and later in his life he shared with Russell strong pacifist inclinations.
    [Show full text]
  • Philip Jourdain, Historiador De Las Matematicas
    NOTAS PHILIP JOURDAIN, HISTORIADOR DE LAS MATEMATICAS ALEJANDRO R. GARCIADIEGO Facultad de Ciencias (México) RESUMEN ABSTRACT Philip Jourdain es conocido por Philip Jourdain is known by los historiadores de las matemáticas, historians of mathematics, among entre otras razones, a través de su other factors, by his correspondence correspondencia con algunos de los with some of the most famous matemáticos más famosos de su mathematicians of his days (e.g., tiempo (e.g., Georg Cantor (1845- Georg Cantor (1845-1918) and 1918) y Bertrand Russell (1872- Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) among 1970), entre otros); por sus artículos others); by his works on the history sobre la historia y filosofía de las and philosophy of mathematics; by his matemáticas; por sus artículos de publications on the theory of sets investigación en torno a la teoría de (especially, on the arithmetic of conjuntos (especialmente, en la transfinite cardinal and ordinal aritmética de los n ŭmeros cardinales y numbers); and, by his translation of ordinales transfinitos); y, por la Cantor's Beitráge... (1895-1897). The traducción del Beitráge... (1895-1897) goal of this essay is to discuss the de Cantor. En este ensayo discutiré la relation between his views of the relación entre sus puntos de vista nature of mathematics and his sobre la naturaleza de las matemáticas conception of the history of y su concepción de la historia de las mathematics which, apparently and at mismas que, aparentemente y a primera first sight, are inconsistent. vista, son contradictorias. 194 NOTAS LLULL 22 1. Introducción Philip Eduard Bertrand Jourdain, el más joven de los hijos del Reverendo F.
    [Show full text]
  • Hugh Maccoll After One Hundred Years
    Philosophia Scientiæ Travaux d'histoire et de philosophie des sciences 15-1 | 2011 Hugh MacColl after One Hundred Years Amirouche Moktefi and Stephen Read (dir.) Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/philosophiascientiae/351 DOI: 10.4000/philosophiascientiae.351 ISSN: 1775-4283 Publisher Éditions Kimé Printed version Date of publication: 1 April 2011 ISBN: 978-2-84174-551-7 ISSN: 1281-2463 Electronic reference Amirouche Moktefi and Stephen Read (dir.), Philosophia Scientiæ, 15-1 | 2011, “Hugh MacColl after One Hundred Years” [Online], Online since 01 April 2011, connection on 15 January 2021. URL: http:// journals.openedition.org/philosophiascientiae/351; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/philosophiascientiae. 351 This text was automatically generated on 15 January 2021. Tous droits réservés Preface Amirouche Moktefi LHSP, Archives H. Poincaré (UMR 7117), Nancy-Université & IRIST (EA 3424), Université de Strasbourg, France Stephen Read Department of Logic and Metaphysics, University of St. Andrews, Scotland “It all turns upon that little word if, Mr. Burton.” [MacColl 1891, 955] This volume is devoted to the life and work of Hugh MacColl (1837- 1909), the Scottish mathematician, philosopher and novelist. Although MacColl is nowadays remembered mainly for his contributions to the science of logic, his work covers many other domains and witnesses the richness and variety of his intellectual interests. MacColl’s early writings (from 1861 onwards) were devoted to mathematics, notably geometry, algebra and the theory of probabilities. In the late 1870s and early 1880s, he published several papers on logic that brought him to the attention of his contemporaries. In these writings, he expressed his preference for propositional calculus instead of the term/class approach, widespread in his day.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Views of Russell and Russell's Logic by His
    SOME VIEWS OF RUSSELL AND RUSSELL’S LOGIC BY HIS CONTEMPORARIES, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO PEIRCE IRVING H. ANELLIS In the years prior to World War I, it was not yet definitively certain that the new logistic developed and espoused by Frege and Russell was the “wave of the future” of mathematical logic. Ernst Schröder’s Vorlesungen über die Algebra der Logik (1895– 1905) was still new and viewed as the cutting edge of (algebraic—as opposed to Aristote- lian) logic; Giuseppe Peano still proclaimed, in his earliest work on logic, his indebted- ness to George Boole, Charles Peirce, and Ernst Schröder, in the first footnote of his Arithmetices principia nova methodo exposita (1898), while, in a letter to Russell of 19 March 1901,1 Peano told Russell that his paper “Sur la logique des relations avec des ap- plications à la théorie des séries” on the logic of relations (1901) just “fills a gap between the work of Peirce and Schröder on the one hand and” his own “Formulaire on the other;” Alfred North Whitehead’s Treatise on Universal Algebra (1898) also still new, brought together the algebraic logic of Boole with the linear and multilinear algebras of Arthur Cayley, James Joseph Sylvester, William Rowan Hamilton, and Charles Peirce’s father Benjamin Peirce, and the calculus of extension of Hermann Grassmann. In his Treatise, Whitehead (p. x) not only named Hamilton and De Morgan as “the first to ex- press quite clearly the general possibilities of algebraic symbolism,” but continually ex- pressed his indebtedness to Boole, Grassmann, De Morgan, Schröder, and John Venn; and he described his Treatise (p.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Mathematics: Selected Writings
    Philosophy Peirce The philosophy of mathematics plays a hilosophy of Peirce’s most vital role in the mature philosophy of Charles s. Peirce. Peirce received rigorous P importa-nt mathematical training from his father and Ma-thema-tic his philosophy carries on in decidedly philosophy Selected Writings writings on the mathematical and symbolic veins. For S Peirce, math was a philosophical tool and philosophy of many of his most productive ideas rest firmly on the foundation of mathematical cha-rles S. Peirce ma-thema-tics principles. This volume collects Peirce’s most important writings on the subject, many appearing in print for the first time. “Focuses on the major Peirce’s determination to understand writings Peirce produced matter, the cosmos, and “the grand design” of the universe remain relevant that are of greatest for contemporary students of science, significance for a correct technology, and symbolic logic. of appreciation of his larger Charles s. PeirCe (1839–1914) Ma-thema-ti was one of america’s most prolific philosophical agenda.” philosophers. he is noted for his —JosePh W. Dauben, contributions to logic, mathematics, City university oF neW york science, and semiotics. MattheW e. Moore is associate Professor of Philosophy at brooklyn College. he is editor of New Essays on Peirce’s Mathematical Philosophy. c Selections from the Writings of Cha-rles S. Peirce s PeirCe Edition ProJeCt INDIANA University Press Bloomington & Indianapolis www.iupress.indiana.edu INDIANA Edited by Ma-tthew E. Moore 1-800-842-6796 Phil of Mathematics MECH.indd 1 6/30/10 10:04 AM Beings of Reason.book Page i Wednesday, June 2, 2010 6:06 PM Philosophy of Mathematics Beings of Reason.book Page ii Wednesday, June 2, 2010 6:06 PM Beings of Reason.book Page iii Wednesday, June 2, 2010 6:06 PM Philosophy of Mathematics Selected Writings Charles S.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophical and Mathematical Correspondence Between Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell in the Years 1902—1904 Some Uninvestigated Topics*
    „Folia Philosophica”. Vol. 35, pp. 85—100 Katowice 2016 ISSN 2353-9445 (online) ISSN 1231-0913 (print) Gabriela Besler Philosophical and Mathematical Correspondence between Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell in the years 1902—1904 Some Uninvestigated Topics* Abstract: Although the connections between Frege’s and Russell’s investigations are commonly known (Hylton 2010), there are some topics in their letters which do not seem to have been analysed until now: 1. Paradoxes formulated by Russell on the basis of Frege’s rules: a) „»ξ can never take the place of a proper name« is a false proposition when ξ is a proposition”; b) “A function never takes the place of a subject.” A solution of this problem was based on the reference/sense theory and on the distinction between the first- and second-level names (Frege). 2. The inconsistency in Frege’s system may be avoided by the introduction of: a) a new kind of objects called quasi-objects (Frege); b) logical types (Frege and Rus- sell); c) mathematics without classes (Russell); d) some restrictions on the domain of function (Frege). 3. Since the inconsistency is connected with a class, what is class? In one of the let- ters, Frege compared a class to a chair composed of atoms. This approach seems to be similar to the collective understanding of a set (Stanisław Leśniewski). 4. Russell doubted that the difference between sense and reference of expressions was essential. Hence, Frege found some additional reasons to distinguish between them: semiotic, epistemological, from identity, and from mathematical practice. This discussion can be seen as a next step in developing the theory of descrip- tions by Bertrand Russell.
    [Show full text]
  • How Bertrand Russell Discovered His Paradox
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector HISTORIA MATHEMATICA 5 (1978), 127-137 HOWBERTRAND RUSSELL DISCOVERED HIS PARADOX BY I, GRATTAN-GUINNESS, MIDDLESEX POLYTECHNIC AT ENFIELD, ENFIELD EN3 4SF SUMMARIES Bertrand Russell's paradox of the class of all classes which do not belong to themselves is among the best-known results in the history of the foundations of mathematics, but the historical circumstances of its discovery are not very well- known. This paper contains a possible re-construct- ion of Russell's line of thought, followed by hitherto unpublished manuscript evidence to support the conjecture. Le paradoxe de la classe de toute les classes n'appartenant pas h elles-m&me est parmi les r&.&tats les mieux connus de l'histoire des fondements des mathr?matiques. N&anmoins, les circonstances entourant sa dgcouverte ne sont pas t&s bien connues. Dans le pr&ent article, nous proposons une reconstitution possible du cheminement de la pen&e de Russell, qui sera suivie d'indications, issues de manuscrits non encore publies, etayant notre conjecture. 1. CANTOR'S DIAGONAL ARGUMENT The first meeting of the Deutsche Mathematiker-Vereinigung was held in September 1891 at Halle/Saale where Georg Cantor was professor of mathematics at the university. He had been instrumental in the founding of the association, and was elected its first chairman. As his contribution to the proceedings he spoke 'On an elementary question of set theory' [1892] in which he presented his diagonal argument to prove the non-denumerability of the linear continuum [l].
    [Show full text]
  • Science and Mathematics Education Centre
    Science and Mathematics Education Centre Students’ Understanding of Evidence in Science through Studying Paradoxes and the Principle of Falsification Steven C. Lockwood This thesis is presented as part of the requirement of the award of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the Curtin University of Technology February 2014 Declaration This thesis does not contain material accepted, in any university, for the award of any other degree or diploma. To the best of my knowledge and belief this thesis contains no material previously published by any other person except where due acknowledgement has been made. Signature: Date: 2 Acknowledgements To my wife Sue, and my children, Morgan, Darcy and Alec, (born during the long and protracted process of thesis generation and writing) I owe a debt of gratitude not least for their preparedness to excuse my absences from fatherly duties but also for their acceptance of my often irritating logical semantics, one of the side-effects of the study of paradox. A particular ‘thank you’ goes to Dr Bevis Yaxley (dec.) and Dr Roya Pugh whose contributions to my well-being during times of challenge, not the least of which occurred when my wife Sue died from breast cancer, afforded me the courage to persist where I may have resolved to give up. To my students, past and present, without whom I would not have written this thesis, particularly those students described admirably by the writer Jorge Luis Borges in his book Labyrinths which I paraphrase. …although I could expect nothing from those students who passively accepted my doctrines, I could of those who, at times, would venture a reasonable contradiction.
    [Show full text]
  • Modernism and the Paradox of Self-Reference
    Snake’s Tail: Modernism and the Paradox of Self-Reference by Jeffrey Scott Blevins A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English and the Designated Emphasis in Critical Theory in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Charles Altieri, Chair Professor C.D. Blanton Professor Kent Puckett Professor Anthony Cascardi Summer 2016 1 Abstract Snake’s Tail: Modernism and the Paradox of Self-Reference By Jeffrey Scott Blevins Doctor of Philosophy in English Designated Emphasis in Critical Theory University of California, Berkeley Professor Charles Altieri, Chair This dissertation explores how modernists envisioned thinking, judging, and acting in conditions of paradox. I hold modernism up against historical developments in logic, mathematics, and analytic philosophy to argue that T.S. Eliot, Robert Frost, Gertrude Stein, and I.A. Richards generated distinctive aesthetic, phenomenological, and affective responses to paradoxical situations. I anchor the work of these modernists in twentieth-century intellectual contexts with which they were all familiar, including the transition out of classical logic into a supposedly unparadoxical new symbolism; the waning of idealism and subsequent waxing of analytic philosophies; and the drive to “complete” mathematics. I demonstrate how modernists drew from these contexts the overarching problem of the liar paradox, whose paradoxical self-reference resisted all of logic’s attempts to resolve it. Articulating an aesthetics of paradox that is shaped by, yet often resistant to, these nascent new philosophies that were themselves defined by the liar paradox, modernists attend to the lived consequences, stylistic repercussions, and emotional tonalities of judging and acting in paradoxical situations.
    [Show full text]
  • How Did Russell Write the Principles of Mathematics?
    <Articles HOW DID RUSSELL WRITE THE PRINCIPLES OF MATHEMATICS (l903)? I. GRATTAN-GUINNESS Middlesex Universiry Enfield, Middlesex EN3 4SF, England [email protected] Parts I II, IV, V, and VI of the book as published were written that autumn [ofI900]. I wrote also Parts I, II, and VII at that time, but had to rewrite them later, so that the book was not finished in its final form until May 1902. Every day throughout October, November and December, I wrote my ten pages, and finished the MS on the last day of the century, in time to write a boastful letter to Helen Thomas about the 200,000 words that I had just completed. (Auto. I: 145) During September 1900 I invented my Logic of Relations; early in October I wrote the article that appeared in RdM VI I 2-3 [Peano's journal Revue des mathematiques]; during the rest ofthe year I wrote Parts II I-VI ofmy Principles (Part VII is largely earlier, Parts I and II wholly later, May 1902).... (Russell, letter to Philip Jourdain, April 19101) I. THE RECEIVED STORY: FROM PEANO TO The Principles ussell's book The Principles ofMathematics, published in the spring of1903, was one ofhis most important works; for in it he R set down not only his logicist thesis, that pure mathematics was obtainable solely from a version oflogic that he had formulated, but also many features of the so-called "analytic philosophy" which he and his friend G. E. Moore had launched around 1899 as a reaction to the domi- 1 I.
    [Show full text]
  • Russell's Metaphysical Accounts of Logic
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by St Andrews Research Repository RUSSELL’S METAPHYSICAL ACCOUNTS OF LOGIC Ryo Ito A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews 2017 Full metadata for this item is available in St Andrews Research Repository at: http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/ Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10023/11744 This item is protected by original copyright This item is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence Russell’s Metaphysical Accounts of Logic Ryo Ito This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews 30 June 2017 1. Candidate’s declarations: I, Ryo Ito, hereby certify that this thesis, which is approximately 78,151 words in length, has been written by me, and that it is the record of work carried out by me, or principally by myself in collaboration with others as acknowledged, and that it has not been submitted in any previous application for a higher degree. I was admitted as a research student in September 2013 and as a candidate for the degree of PhD in June 2017; the higher study for which this is a record was carried out in the University of St Andrews between 2013 and 2017. Date 30 June 2017 signature of candidate ……… 2. Supervisor’s declaration: I hereby certify that the candidate has fulfilled the conditions of the Resolution and Regulations appropriate for the degree of PhD in the University of St Andrews and that the candidate is qualified to submit this thesis in application for that degree.
    [Show full text]