This paper discusses the problems of an ontological value of the variable in Russell’s philosophy. The variable is essential in Russell’s theory of denotation, which among other things, purports to prove Meinongian being outside of subsistence and existence to be logically unnecessary. I argue that neither Russell’s epistemology nor his ontology can account for the ontological value of the variable without running into qualities of Meinongian being that Russell disputed. The problem is that the variable cannot be logically grounded by Russell’s theory of denotation. As such, in so far as being is concerned, Meinong and Russell’s theories are much closer than is typically thought. The arguments are supported with concerns raised by Russell, Frege, and Moore regarding the ontological value of the variable. The problem can be summarised as follows: the variable is the fundamental denoting-position of a formal theory that is meant to explain the structure of the ontological. If such a formal theory is meant to ground the ontological, then the formal must also represent the actual structure of the ontological. Yet the variable, the fundamental symbol of denotation in a theory that defines objects, is ontologically indefinable.
Falls das inline PDF nicht korrekt dargestellt ist, können Sie das PDF hier herunterladen.
Albertazzi, Liliana, Dale Jacqette and Roberto Poli. “Meinong in His and Our Times.” In The School of Alexius Meinong, edited by Liliana Albertazzi, Dale Jacquette and Roberto Poli, 3-48. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing, 2001.
Benoist, Jocelyn and Markus Gabriel. Talk presented to Philosophie et Psychoanalyse, Paris: Université Paris 1 Panthéon, February 3rd, 2018.
Chisholm, Roderick M. “Meinong, Alexius (1853-1920).” Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by D. M. Borchert. 2nd ed. (2006), Vol. 6, Detroit: Macmillan, 1967.
Findlay, John N. Meinong’s Theory of Objects. London: Oxford University Press, 1933.
Frege, Gottlob. “Begriffschrift: A Formula Language, Modeled Upon that of Arithmetic, for Pure Thought.” In Frege and Godel: Two Fundamental Texts in Mathematical Logic, edited and translated by Jean Van Heijenoort, 1-81. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press, 1912.
Grattan-Guiness, Ivor. “Bertrand Russell on his paradox and the multiplicative axiom. An unpublished letter to Philip Jourdain.” Journal of Philosophical Logic. 6:2 (1972), 103-110.
Griffin, Nicholas. “Russell’s Critique of Meinong’s Theory of Objects.” Grazer Philosophische Studien. 25 (1985-86), 375-401.
Lambert, Karel. Meinong and the Principle of Independence: Its Place in Meinong’s Theory of Objects and its Significance in Contemporary Philosophica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Marek, Johann. “Alexius Meinong.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2009 <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/meinong/>.
Meinong, Alexius. “The Theory of Objects.” In Realism and the Background of Phenomenology, edited by Roderick M. Chisholm, translated by Isaac Levi, D.B. Terrell, and Roderick M Chisholm, 76-117. Glencoe: Free Press, 1904.
Meinong, Alexius. “Object of Higher Order and Their Relationship to Internal Perception.” In Alexius Meinong on Objects of Higher Order and Husserl’s Phenomenology, translated by Marie Luise Schubert, 137-208. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1978.
Meinong, Alexius. Über Annehmen: Zweite Auflage. Leibzig, Der Universität Graz, 1910.
Meinong, Alexius.“Über Gegenstandstheorie.” In Untersuchungen Zur Gegenstandstheorie und Psychologie, 1-50. Leibzig: Der Universität Graz, 1904.
Parsons, Terence. “Are There Nonexistent Objects?” American Philosophical Quarterly. 19:12 (Oct 1982), 365-371.
Pasniczek, Jacek. The Logic of Intentional Objects: A Meinongian Version of Classical Logic. Dordrecht, London, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic, 1998.
Rapaport, William. “Meinongian Theories and a Russellian Paradox.” Noûs. 12: 2 (1978), 153-180.
Routley, Richard (Richard Sylvan). Exploring Meinong’s Jungle and Beyond. An Investigation of Noneism and the Theory of Items, Canberra: Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University, 1980.
Routley, Richard and Valerie Routley. “Rehabilitating Meinong’s theory of objects”. Revue Internationale de Philosophie.27:104/105 (1973), 224-254.
Russell, Bertrand. “Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. 11 (1910), 108-28.
Russell, Bertrand. Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell: Foundations of Logic 1903-1905, edited by Alasdair Urquhart. New York and London: Routledge, 1994.
Russell, Bertrand. “Classes.” In Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell: Foundations of Logic 1903-1905, edited by Alasdair Urquhart, 3-37. New York and London: Routledge, 1994.
Russell, Bertrand. “Meinong’s Theory of Complexes and Assumptions.” In The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell 4: Foundations of Logic 1903-1905, edited by Alasdair Urquhart, 431-474. London and New York: Routledge, 1994.
Russell, Bertrand. “My Mental Development.” In The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russell, edited by Robert E. Egner and Lester E. Denonn. Oxon, Routledge, 2009.