Abstract
In this article I examine the dispute between F. H. Bradley and Bertrand Russell concerning the reality of relations. I show that Bradley’s objections to Russell’s view, that there are such things as relations which serve to effect the unity of complex items, were rooted in a methodological approach which Russell did not share. On Bradley’s view, one must be able to offer reductive analyses of the items one postulates in order that commitment to those items be justified. I argue that Russell expressly rejected this methodological principle of Bradley’s, and instead adopted the view that one may justifiably postulate entities if doing so aids in the illumination of mathematical truths. I show that the postulation of relations does, on Russell’s view, serve to provide that illumination. Russell held that the truths of mathematics constitute fixed data, and that philosophical positions may be judged as successful according to the extent that they possess explanatory power with respect to this data. I argue that Bradley’s and Russell’s exchanges in print, as well as in private correspondence, reflect Russell’s awareness of a fundamental difference in methodological approach. I conclude that Russell elected not to answer Bradley’s objections on their own terms, but rather rejected the methodological assumptions from which those objections emerged.
Bradley, F. H., 21897. Appearance and Reality. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1914. Essays on Truth and Reality. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1999. Selected Correspondence, January 1905 – June 1924. Ed. by C. A. Keene. Bristol.Search in Google Scholar
Carnap, R. 1931. “The Logicist Foundation in Mathematics”. In Philosophy of Mathematics, Selected Readings. Ed. by P. Benacerraf/H. Putnam. Cambridge, 41–51.Search in Google Scholar
Demopoulos, W. 1981. “New Work on Russell’s Early Philosophy” [Review of “Bertrand Russell’s Early Philosophy”, Part I. Ed. by J. Hintikka. Synthese 45, 1]. Russell: The Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 1(2), 163–70.10.15173/russell.v1i2.1530Search in Google Scholar
Gödel, K. 1944. “Russell’s Mathematical Logic”. In Gödel’s Collected Works, Vol. II. Ed. by F. Solomon. New York, 119–41.Search in Google Scholar
Grice, H. P./Strawson, P. 1956. “In Defence of a Dogma”. The Philosophical Review 65(2), 141–58.10.2307/2182828Search in Google Scholar
Griffin, N. 1980. “Russell on the Nature of Logic (1903–1918)”. Synthese 45(1), Bertrand Russell’s Early Philosophy, Part I, 117–88.10.1007/BF00413988Search in Google Scholar
–. 1983. “Reply to Demopoulos”. Russell: The Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 3(1), 43–47.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1991. Russell’s Idealist Apprenticeship. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
Hempel, C. 1964. “On the Nature of Mathematical Truth”. In Philosophy of Mathematics, Selected Readings. Ed. by P. Benacerraf/H. Putnam. Cambridge, 377–93.10.1017/CBO9781139171519.020Search in Google Scholar
Irvine, A. D. 1989. “Epistemic Logicism and Russell’s Regressive Method”. Philosophical Studies 55, 303–27.10.1007/BF00355328Search in Google Scholar
Kilmister, C. W. 1998. “A Certain Knowledge? Russell’s Mathematics and Logical Analysis”. In Bertrand Russell and the Origins of Analytic Philosophy. Ed. by R. Monk/A. Palmer. Bristol, 269–86.Search in Google Scholar
Klement, K. C. 2012. “Neo-logicism and Russell’s Logicism”. Russell: The Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 32(2), 127–59.10.1353/rss.2012.0002Search in Google Scholar
Kraal, A. 2014. “The Aim of Russell’s Early Logicism: A Reinterpretation”. Synthese 191, 1493–510.10.1007/s11229-013-0342-9Search in Google Scholar
Lebens, S. 2017. “Russell and Bradley: Revisiting the Creation Narrative of Analytic Philosophy”. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 5, 1–20.10.15173/jhap.v5i7.3050Search in Google Scholar
Levine, J. 2011. “Russell and the Transfinite”. Hermathena 190, Philosophy and Mathematics, 53–112.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2018. “Russell and Idealism”. In The Bloomsbury Companion to Bertrand Russell. Ed. by R. Wahl. London, 17–58.Search in Google Scholar
Monk, R. 1996. Bertrand Russell: The Spirit of Solitude. London.Search in Google Scholar
Olson, D./Griffin, N. 2018. “Russell’s Bridge”. In The Bloomsbury Companion to Bertrand Russell. Ed. by R. Wahl. London, 286–311.Search in Google Scholar
Patton, L. 2017. “Russell’s Method of Analysis and the Axioms of Mathematics”. In Innovations in the History of Analytical Philosophy. Ed. by S. Lapointe/C. Pincock. London, 105–26.10.1057/978-1-137-40808-2_4Search in Google Scholar
Pears, D. F. (ed.) 1918. The Philosophy of Logical Atomism. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
Proops, I. 2006. “Russell’s Reasons for Logicism”. Journal of the History of Philosophy 22(4), 267–92.10.1353/hph.2006.0029Search in Google Scholar
Rodriguez-Consuegra, F. 2004. “Propositional Ontology and Logical Atomism”. In One Hundred Years of Russell’s Paradox: Mathematics, Logic, and Philosophy. Ed. by G. Link. Berlin, 417–34.Search in Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1899. “The Classification of Relations”. In The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, ii: Philosophical Papers, 1896–99. Ed. by K. Blackwell et al. London, 138–46.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1900. The Philosophy of Leibniz. London.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1903. The Principles of Mathematics. Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1906. “Les Paradoxes de la Logique”. Revue de Metaphysique et de Morale 14, 627–50. Trans. by Russell as “On ‘Insolubilia’ and their Solution by Symbolic Logic”. In Russell 1973, 190–214.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1907. “The Regressive Method of Discovering the Premises of Mathematics”. Read before the Cambridge Mathematical Club, 9 March 1907. Published in Russell 1973, 272–83.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1910. “Some Explanations in Reply to Mr. Bradley”. Mind 19, 373–78.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1911. “L’importance philosophique de la logistique”. Revue de Metaphysique et de Morale 19, 281–91. Trans. by P. E. B. Jourdain (with revisions by Russell) as “The Philosophical Implications of Mathematical Logic”. Published 1913 in The Monist 23, 481–93. Reprinted in Russell 1973, 284–94. Page numbers refer to Russell 1973.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1918. “The Philosophy of Logical Atomism” In Pears, D. F. (ed.) 1918. Oxford, 1–125.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1924. “Logical Atomism”. In Pears, D. F. (ed.) 1918. Oxford, 126–50.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1925. Principia Mathematica, vol. 1, 2nd edition; partially reprinted in Principia Mathematica, abbrev. version to chap. 56. Cambridge, 1962.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1973. Essays in Analysis. Ed. by D. Lackey. London.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1993. The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, iii: Towards the Principles of Mathematics. Ed. by G. H. Moore. London.Search in Google Scholar
Spinney, O. T. 2020. “Bradley and Moore on Common Sense”. Idealistic Studies 50(3), 291–313.10.5840/idstudies2020114121Search in Google Scholar
Stevens, G. 2006. “Russell’s Repsychologising of the Proposition”. Synthese 151(1), 99–124.10.1007/s11229-004-2246-1Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
