MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366809794 · doi:10.1353/rss.2000.0008

Russellian Propositions

2000· article· en· W4366809794 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Giovanni de Carvalho

Bibliographic record

VenueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicWittgensteinian philosophy and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsidePropositionCriticismPhilosophyEpistemologyFunction (biology)SociologyHumanitiesLiteratureArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviews 181 RUSSELLIAN PROPOSITIONS GIOVANNI DE CARVALHO Rua Adriano, 102/801 cob 20735-060 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil GIOVANNIDUARTE@UOL.COM.BR Guillermo Hurtado. Proposiciones Russellianas. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional AutonoIlla de Mexico, 1998. Pp. 337. $120.00 Mexican pesos. G iven its scope and the amount of problems with which it deals, this bO.:Jk is not an easy one. Hurtado assigned himself the job ofscrutinizing an old project Russell had plit aside under severe criticism from Wittgenstein. I'm talking about the 1913 manuscript of Theory ofKnowledge. Wittgenstein showed Russell that the theory of belief he presented in that manuscript was inconsistent . Hurtado was particularly intrigued by the fact that Russell was paralysed by Wittgenstein's famous objection. The problem was a hard one, he admitted, bur it could be resolved, given enough effort. Then why didn't Russell resolve it? Hurtado's inquietude led him to proceed with an investigation, which resulted in the writing of this book. The book provides a completely new and systematic account of Russell's early philosophy by focusing on its cornerstones: Russell's ideas of predication, propositional function and the proposition. Hurtado claims to have fullyexamined what Russell said about those subjects during the years 1900 through 1913, which are considered his most productive years. It turns out that these conceptions are far more profound and obscure than is currently supposed. His task was to examine them under a new light. The book has a hybrid nature, in which historical facts are mixed together with Hurtado's own philosophical insights into Russell's ideas. In spite of Hurtado's efforts to separate things, this way of exposing Russell's viewpoint in contrast to his own, in my opinion, may bring some confusion, and at times it is hard to tell whether he is elucidating what Russell said or stating his own 182 Reviews ideas about it. Hurtado divides the book into three parts, dealing respectively with (1) relations and predication; (2) denotation and propositional functions; and (3) descriptions, logical types and beliefs. In the epilogue he proposes what he claims to be his own contribution to "a neo-Russellian theory of predication". The first part of the book deals with relations and predication. It is currently accepted that Russell vigorously rejected the idea that all relations are internal. But Hurtado shows that neither Russell nor the idealists were very clear about what an internal relation is. It is against this background that Russell's doctrines of external relations must be understood. And what about Russell's conception of predication? Here Hurtado sees Russell subject to apparently antagonistic intuitions. On pages 84-5 of The Principles ofMathematics, Russell supports the intuition that the copula is not a relation but has a relational nature. In Chapter IV of the same book he says that predication is logically a relation but is not a relation. This means that Russell recognizes the relational nature ofpredication but cannot accommodate this view in the framework of his ontology. The problem remains offinding a substratum for predication, something that relates without being a relation. In the epilogue Hurtado proposes a way of doing it. The second part of the book deals with denotation and propositional functions . Hurtado is particularly intrigued by the fact that Russell's positions regarding propositional functions have always been ambivalent. It is true, he points out, that on occasions, in the Principles, Russell held the position that we have to take the notion of propositional function as primitive, but Hurtado thinks this position must be understood in the context of the Russellian logicist project in the Principles. To the specific ends of that project (mainly to reduce mathematics to formal logic without the theory of types), yes, we have to take the notion of propositional function as primitive. On the other hand, Russell also said many interesting things about propositional functions that go far beyond the necessities of the logicist project. If, according to Hurtado, we can find in the Principles the elements for a theory of propositional functions, then why did Russell say that we have to take this notion as primitive? Hurtado's interpretation is, in his own words, that "maybe Russell...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.019

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell StudiesSame topicWittgensteinian philosophy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207