## Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic

### Russell, Presupposition, and the Vicious-Circle Principle

Darryl Jung

#### Abstract

Prompted by Poincaré, Russell put forward his celebrated vicious-circle principle (vcp) as the solution to the modern paradoxes. Ramsey, Gödel, and Quine, among others, have raised two salient objections against Russell's vcp. First, Gödel has claimed that Russell's various renderings of the vcp really express distinct principles and thus, distinct solutions to the paradoxes, a claim that gainsays one of Russell's positions on the nature of the solution to the paradoxes, namely, that such a solution be uniform. Secondly, Ramsey, Gödel, and Quine have protested that the vcp's proscription against impredicative specification is incompatible with a realistic conception of the domain of quantification, a conception that Russell certainly held. I examine Russell's vcp and defend it against these objections.

#### Article information

Source
Notre Dame J. Formal Logic Volume 40, Number 1 (1999), 55-80.

Dates
First available in Project Euclid: 5 December 2002

http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ndjfl/1039096305

Digital Object Identifier
doi:10.1305/ndjfl/1039096305

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR1811203

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
0968.03012

#### Citation

Jung, Darryl. Russell, Presupposition, and the Vicious-Circle Principle. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 40 (1999), no. 1, 55--80. doi:10.1305/ndjfl/1039096305. http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ndjfl/1039096305.

#### References

• [1] Boolos, G., To be is to be the value of a variable (or some values of some variables),'' Journal of Philosophy, vol. 81 (1984), pp. 430--50.
• [2] Boolos, G., Nominalist Platonism,'' Philosophical Review, vol. 94 (1985), pp. 327--44.
• [3] Carnap, R., The Logical Syntax of Language, translated by A. Smeaton, Harcourt Brace, London, 1937.
• [4] Chihara, C., Ontology and the Vicious-Circle Principle, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1973.
• [5] Copi, I., The Theory of Logical Types, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1971.
• [6] de Rouilhan, P., Russell et le cercle des paradoxes, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1996.
• [7] Fraenkel, A., Y. Bar-Hillel, and A. Levy, Foundations of Set Theory, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1984.
• [8] Gödel, K., Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme, 1,'' Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik, vol. 38 (1931), pp. 173--98. Translated as On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems, 1,'' pp. 145--205 in Kurt Gödel: Collected Works, vol. 1, edited by S. Feferman et al., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986, and pp. 596--616 in J. van Heijenoort, From Frege to Gödel, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1967.
• [9] Gödel, K., Russell's mathematical logic,'' pp. 119--41 in Kurt Gödel: Collected Works, vol. 2., edited by S. Feferman et al., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1990.
• [10] Goldfarb, W., Russell's reasons for ramification,'' pp. 24--40 in Rereading Russell: Essays on Bertrand Russell's Metaphysics and Epistemology, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, edited by C.W. Savage and C. A. Anderson, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1989.
• [11] Hallett, M., Cantorian Set Theory and Limitation of Size, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1984.
• [12] Hylton, P., Russell, Idealism, and the Emergence of Analytic Philosophy, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1990.
• [13] Hylton, P., The Vicious-Circle Principle: Comments on Philippe de Rouilhan,'' Philosophical Studies, vol. 65 (1992), pp. 183--91.
• [14] Kant, I., The Critique of Pure Reason, translated by N. K. Smith, MacMillan Press, London, 1982.
• [15] Kremer, M., The argument of On Denoting','' The Philosophical Review, vol. 103 (1994), pp. 249--97.
• [16] Landini, G., Russell's substitutional theory of classes and relations,'' History and Philosophy of Logic, vol. 8 (1987), pp. 171--200.
• [17] Landini, G., New evidence concerning Russell's substitutional theory of classes,'' Russell, n.s., vol. 9 (1989), pp. 26--42.
• [18] Landini, G., Reconciling PM's ramified type theory with the doctrine of the unrestricted variable of the Principles,'' pp. 361--94 in Russell and Analytic Philosophy, edited by A. D. Irvine and G. A. Wedeking, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1993.
• [19] Levy, A., Basic Set Theory, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1979.
• [20] Linsky, B., Propositional functions and universals in Principia Mathematica,'' Australasian Journal of Philosophy, vol. 66, (1988), pp. 447--60.
• [21] Linsky, B., Why Russell abandoned Russellian propositions,'' pp. 193--209 in Russell and Analytic Philosophy, edited by A. D. Irvine and G. A. Wedeking, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1993.
• [22] Linsky, B., Russell's Metaphysical Logic, CSLI Publications, Stanford, 1999.
• [23] Pelham, J., and A. Urquhart, Russellian propositions,'' pp. 307--26 in Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science, vol. 9, edited by D. Prawitz, B. Skyrms, and D. Westerstå hl, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, 1994.
• [24] Poincaré, H., Les mathématiques et la logique,'' Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, vol. 13 (1905), pp. 815--35; vol. 14 (1906), pp. 17--34 and 294--317.
• [25] Poincaré, H., The latest efforts of the logicians,'' pp. 472--85 in The Foundations of Science: Science and Hypothesis, the Value of Science, Science and Method, translated by G. B. Halstead, The Science Press, New York, 1929.
• [26] Quine, W. V., New foundations for mathematical logic,'' American Mathematical Monthly, vol. 44 (1937), pp. 70--80.
• [27] Quine, W. V., Set Theory and Its Logic, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1969.
• [28] Ramsey, F. P., Foundations of mathematics,'' pp. 152--212 in Foundations, edited by D. H. Mellor, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, 1978.
• [29] Russell, B., Paper 1'' (1899--1900 unpublished draft of Principles), pp. 13--180 in The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell: Toward the Principles of Mathematics'' 1900--02, vol. 3, edited by G. H. Moore, Routledge, London, 1993.
• [30] Russell, B., Paper 2'' (1901 unpublished draft of Principles), pp. 184--208 in The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell: Toward the Principles of Mathematics'', 1900--02, vol. 3, edited by G. H. Moore, Routledge, London, 1993.
• [31] Russell, B., The Principles of Mathematics (Principles), 2d edition, Norton, New York, 1938.
• [32] Russell, B., On denoting,'' pp. 103--19 in Essays in Analysis, edited by D. Lackey, George Braziller, New York, 1973.
• [33] Russell, B., On some difficulties in the theory of transfinite numbers and order types,'' pp. 135--64 in Essays in Analysis, edited by D. Lackey, George Braziller, New York, 1973.
• [34] Russell, B., Les paradoxes de la logique,'' translated as On Insolubilia' and their solution in symbolic logic'' pp. 190--214 in Essays in Analysis, edited by D. Lackey, George Braziller, New York, 1973.
• [35] Russell, B., Mathematical logic as based on the theory of types,'' pp. 59--102 in Logic and Knowledge, edited by R. C. Marsh, George Allen and Unwin, London, 1956.
• [36] Tarski, A., The concept of truth in formalized languages'' (Wahrheitsbegriff''), pp. 152--278 in Logic, Semantics, and Metamathematics, Hackett, Indianapolis, 1983.
• [37] Whitehead, A. N., and B. Russell, Principia Mathematica (Principia), 2d edition, vol. 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1927.