Russell. N.s. Vol. 33, no. 1. Summer 2013



Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies is published by The Bertrand Russell Research Centre, McMaster University. For ordering information, including prices, see the back issues table.


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Editor’s Notes
J.B. Galaugher“Substitution’s Unsolved ‘Insolubilia’ ”
ABSTRACT: Russell’s substitutional theory conferred philosophical advantages over the simple type theory it was to emulate. However, it faced propositional paradoxes, and in a 1906 paper “On ‘Insolubilia’ and Their Solution by Symbolic Logic”, he modified the theory to block these paradoxes while preserving Cantor’s results. My aim is to draw out several quandaries for the interpretation of the role of substitution in Russell’s logic. If he was aware of the substitutional (p0a0) paradox in 1906, why did he advertise “Insolubilia” as a solution to the Epimenides? If he was dissatisfied with the solution, as his correspondence suggests, why did he go on to publish it? Why did substitution reappear with orders in “Mathematical Logic as Based on the Theory of Types” if he had rejected a hierarchy of orders as intolerable? I offer the following as possible explanations: he construed the “logical Epimenides” as a version of the (p0a0) paradox; his dissatisfaction with the “Insolubilia” solution was philosophical, not technical; and substitution re-emerged because he hoped for a new philosophical gloss on orders. Whether or not my explanations are correct, these issues must be addressed in accounting for Russell’s reasons for ramification.
Alan Schwerin“Russell on Hume’s Account of the Self ”
ABSTRACT: The History of Western Philosophy enhanced Russell’s broad reputation among members of the public and helped secure his finances. But the academic community was less enthusiastic about the text and tended to treat it with contempt. My paper is a critical investigation of one of the central chapters of Russell’s History: namely, Russell’s rendition of David Hume’s view on the self. My argument is that Russell’s concise treatment of le bon David’s provocative views on the self must be read with great care—otherwise a misunderstanding of Russell’s interpretation is likely to be foisted on this popular and influential twentieth-century text.
Kenneth Blackwell“Recent Acquisitions, 2009–13”
Russell WahlReview of Bernard Linsky, The Evolution of Principia Mathematica
I. Grattan-GuinnessReview of Marjorie Senechal, I Died for Beauty
Chad TrainerReview of Tim Phillips, Bertrand Russell’s The Conquest of Happiness
Stefan AnderssonReview of Erik J. Wielenberg, God and the Reach of Reason
Kenneth BlackwellReview of George H. Quester, Nuclear Monopoly
James ConnellyReview of Graham Stevens, The Theory of Descriptions


* Russell Research Centre * Faculty of Humanities * Russell Archives * McMaster University

Page maintained by Arlene Duncan. Last updated 30 July 2013.