Analysis reveals inconsistencies in Russell’s theory of existence and acquaintance, suggesting a pivotal change toward higher-order perspectives.
I argue that, in the period 1910–15, Bertrand Russell’s theory of existence is inconsistent with his theory of acquaintance. This inconsistency not only highlights that Russell’s thinking about existence is bound up with his epistemology, but also shows that it is only in 1918–19 that he finally comes to his influential higher-order theory of existence. Finally, I briefly argue that Russell’s eventual rejection of the distinction between being and existence goes hand-in-hand with his acceptance of a theory of universals according to which they are essentially predicative.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
William W. Cohen (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: