New answers tagged

3

What might seem odd to you is that Russell treats the description operator in a syncategorematic way. That is, the operator itself is not associated with an explicitly defined operation, but formulas containing the operator are associated with satisfaction conditions. The problem with syncategorematic treatments is that the syntax of the formula interpreting ...


4

The purpose of Russell’s Theory of Descriptions is precisely to give meaning (i.e. truth value) to a statement concerning a non-existent entity. The basic assumtpion is that names of individuals must refer to existing objects (individuals). Thus, what does it mean to assert something about a non-existing objects referring to it with a sort of "name" ? The ...


1

Your question might be a duplicate...the first paragraph of my reply is virtually identical to a reply I posted to another question recently, though I can't remember what it was. Your question evokes the timeless debate made famous by Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Rousseau had a very romanticized view of Nature, while Hobbes thought people living ...


1

I have wondered this too, and with a skeptical lens I have found that most people who answer this use anecdotal evidence to support their conclusions. A vague term that you are using in your question is "measuring human happiness". The most common way that researchers assess happiness is through self-reports, which can be misleading. An interesting case I ...


Top 50 recent answers are included