Abstract According to Russellianism, the content of a Russellian thought, in which a person ascribes a monadic property to an object, can be represented as an ordered couple of the object and the property. A consequence of this is that it is not possible for a person to believe that a is F and not to believe b is F, when a=b. Many critics of Russellianism suppose that this is possible and thus that Russellianism is false. Several arguments for this claim are criticized and it is argued that Russellians need not appeal to representational notions in order to defeat them. Contrary to popular opinion, the prospects for a pure Russellianism, a Russellianism without representations, are in fact very good.
[1]
Thomas J. McKay.
On proper names in belief ascriptions
,
1981
.
[2]
Keith A. Coleman,et al.
On the Propositional Attitudes
,
1991
.
[3]
R. Gaskin.
FREGEAN SENSE AND RUSSELLIAN PROPOSITIONS
,
1997
.
[4]
Paul Boghossian,et al.
The Transparency of Mental Content
,
1994
.
[5]
A. Morton.
Talk About Beliefs
,
1994
.
[6]
R. Marcus.
Rationality and Believing the Impossible
,
1983
.
[7]
S. Schiffer.
THE 'FIDO'-FIDO THEORY OF BELIEF
,
1987
.
[8]
Anthony Appiah,et al.
Frege's puzzle
,
1988
.
[9]
David Kaplan.
Quantifying in
,
2004,
Synthese.