Russell on Generality 1910 to 1918

In Principia Mathematica, Russell thought that there are irreducibly general judgements with their own mode of truth. They are true in virtue of what the elementary judgements they collect together correspond to. In The Philosophy of Logical Atomism, Russell thought that they are true in virtue of general facts. In 1910, general facts are not even considered in order to reject them. In 1918, Russell announces that it cannot be doubted that there are general facts. This raises an intriguing question. What was it that led Russell to drop his 1910 view and drove him to the conclusion that there are general facts? I propose an answer that relies on a core aspect of Russell’s views on which he stayed firm throughout this period and on a preoccupation of his that began well before 1910: theories of truth and the problem of how false judgements are possible. I argue that Russell’s 1910 view failed to account adequately for the falsity of general judgements, while the correspondence theory of truth pushed him to accepting general facts. To round things off I also consider three independent arguments for general facts.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy
Published
2025-08-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.15173/jhap.v13i4.5411
Primary Topic
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Russell on Generality 1910 to 1918

Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
article

Russell on Generality 1910 to 1918

article en

Abstract

In Principia Mathematica, Russell thought that there are irreducibly general judgements with their own mode of truth. They are true in virtue of what the elementary judgements they collect together correspond to. In The Philosophy of Logical Atomism, Russell thought that they are true in virtue of general facts. In 1910, general facts are not even considered in order to reject them. In 1918, Russell announces that it cannot be doubted that there are general facts. This raises an intriguing question. What was it that led Russell to drop his 1910 view and drove him to the conclusion that there are general facts? I propose an answer that relies on a core aspect of Russell’s views on which he stayed firm throughout this period and on a preoccupation of his that began well before 1910: theories of truth and the problem of how false judgements are possible. I argue that Russell’s 1910 view failed to account adequately for the falsity of general judgements, while the correspondence theory of truth pushed him to accepting general facts. To round things off I also consider three independent arguments for general facts.

Journal for the History of Analytical PhilosophyVol. 13(4)
Ruhr University Bochum (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 47%
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Russell on Generality 1910 to 1918 · Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS