Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T22:35:33.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Development of Russell's Structural Postulates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Michael P. Bradie
Michael P. Bradie*
Affiliation:
Bowling Green State University
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

From 1914 on Russell's epistemology was dominated by the attempt to show how we come by our knowledge of the external world. As he gradually became aware of the inadequacies of the “pure empiricist” approach, Russell realized that his program was viable only insofar as certain postulates of inference were allowed. In this paper I trace the development of the structural postulates from Analysis of Matter to Human Knowledge. The basic continuity of Russell's thought is established. Certain confusions implicit in the various formulations of the postulates are brought to light. Finally, it is argued that the viability of Russell's program rests on a larger number of independent postulates than he thought were needed. Some implications of Russell's work for current work in the philosophy of science are briefly sketched.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , September 1977, pp. 441 - 463
Copyright
Copyright © 1977 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

†

This research was supported, in part, by a research grant from the Faculty Research Committee of Bowling Green State University. The paper was revised during tenure of a National Endowment for the Humanities Fellowship-in-Residence. I want to thank David Lewis for some helpful comments and suggestions.

References

[1] Carnap, R. The Continuum of Inductive Methods. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952.Google Scholar
[2] Carnap, R. “Inductive Logic and Inductive Intuition.” In Aspects of Inductive Logic. Edited by Hintikka, J. and Suppes, P. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1966, pp. 258–267.Google Scholar
[3] Hilpinen, R. “Relational Hypotheses and Inductive Inference.” Synthese 23 (1971): 266–286.10.1007/BF00413630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Hay, W. H. “Bertrand Russell on the Justification of Induction.” In Probability, Confirmation and Simplicity: Readings in the Philosophy of Inductive Logic. Edited by Foster, M. H. and Martin, M. L. New York: Odyssey Press, 1966, pp. 383–395.Google Scholar
[5] Hintikka, J. “Toward a theory of inductive generalization.” In Proceedings of the 1964 International Congress for Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. Edited by Bar-Hillel, Y. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1965, pp. 274–288.Google Scholar
[6] Hintikka, J. “A Two-Dimensional Continuum of Inductive Methods.” In Aspects of Inductive Logic. Edited by Hintikka, J. and Suppes, P. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1966, pp. 113–132.10.1016/S0049-237X(08)71666-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Jeffrey, R. C. The Logic of Decision. New York: McGraw Hill, 1965.Google Scholar
[8] Maxwell, G. “The Ontological Status of Theoretical Entities.” In Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. III. Edited by Feigl, H. and Maxwell, G. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1962, pp. 3–27.Google Scholar
[9] Maxwell, G. “Russell on Perception: A Study in Philosophical Method.” In Bertrand Russell. A Collection of Critical Essays. Edited by Pears, D. New York: Doubleday Anchor, 1972, pp. 110–146.Google Scholar
[10] Maxwell, G. “Corroboration Without Demarcation.” In The Philosophy of Karl Popper, Vol. I. Edited by Schilpp, P. LaSalle, Ill.: Open Court, 1974, pp. 292–321.Google Scholar
[11] Russell, B. Our Knowledge of the External World. New York: Mentor, 1960.Google Scholar
[12] Russell, B. The Analysis of Matter. New York: Dover, 1954.Google Scholar
[13] Russell, B. An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth. Baltimore: Pelican, 1962.Google Scholar
[14] Russell, B. Human Knowledge. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1948.Google Scholar
[15] Smart, J. J. C. Philosophy and Scientific Realism. New York: Humanities Press, 1968.Google Scholar