Rusell’s Theory of Reference Essay Example for Free

Rusell’s Theory of Reference Essay Language is very powerful. It can isolate one individual or allowed it to communicate with other people. We acquire a lot of skills and knowledge through the use of language. We used language for cultural adaptation. Some thinkers would just put it that way, accept language as part of our mundane existence, while others were engrossed on it. More than its social significance one cannot deny that language is important to the discourse of man thus some scholars put much value on the power of language in solving the puzzles in life. The structure of language became a preoccupation not just by linguistics but even by philosophy. It is the hope of philosophy in untangling the mess on the previous era. But before one would even speak of solving puzzles, s/he is already caught in the question as to what is the connection of language to the real world? Is there a world outside the rules of language? With that we begin to digest the underlying themes and issues in the development of philosophy of language. One of the issues concerning philosophers of language is, in what way can language represent the world. Moreover, do names pertains to the things themselves, as we experienced them? Is our description of the world the exact replica of the world? These are questions that not only Philosophy of language discussed but even those interested in metaphysics. If during the time of Descartes, philosophers are preoccupied with the debate between realism and idealism, in looking at the philosophy of language one can see that this debate did not die out but was transformed into a more investigative one such that scholars do not only discuss the world outside our representation of it, but also the connection between words, thoughts, meanings, reality and truth. In tracing the development of philosophy, one could conclude that philosophy undergone three stages; at first, ancient philosophers such as Parmenides and Heraclitus were concern about the world of world (or cosmos),second stage is the world of ideas, were the interest of thinkers includes, the dichotomy between the body and the mind, or of reality and ideas, and lastly is the world of language, were philosophers recognized the muddles of philosophy in the past particularly in the branch of metaphysics is due to the problems in language. How can one expressed or represent the world through language? Are the meanings we associate with the words have something to do with reality? It is in this light that logic was employed by some thinkers in trying to explain the connection of words with the thing itself. Does the word ‘chicken’ for instance pertains to something out there? Are the two thing the same or independent with each other? These will be explored in the succeeding parts focusing specifically on the theory of reference by Bertrand Russell coupled with the reaction of his protege Ludwig Wittgenstein. These two analytical philosophers became very influential that Time magazine(2003) even considered them as two of the 100 most important people of the Century. At first, the theory of reference must be clarified. What do the philosophers such as Russell mean by â€Å"reference? † Reference pertains to the relation derived from the expression and what the person used to talk about such expression (Reimer: 2003). The major question is in what way words can refer? Or what are the rules in referring? This concern about reference is also in relation to truth and meaning. Russell, considered as a descriptivist, believed in the description theory whereby proper name do â€Å"refers† because of the descriptive content associated with it by the speaker (Reimer: 2003). However he also clarified that proper names can vary from one speaker to another. For example, Peter (one person) may be called by someone as her son, and husband by another. As opposed to Frege, Russell go further in explaining that definite descriptions are not really referring expressions because they are not â€Å"logically proper names (Ibid). † In his collaboration with Whitehead, Russell developed his ideas that mathematical truths can be translated to logical truths. This reduction of Logic to Mathematics is known as Logicism. Maybe one would asked, why is there a need for this? Russell together with Whitehead wanted to provide solution in the difficulties of language which is why they look at the possibility that formal rules of logic could help solve the problem. This new tradition in Philosophy marked the attitude of a philosopher in understanding the world by knowing the opportunities and limitations impinge on us by language. Rusell became known in analytical philosophy also because of his theory of logical atomism (Klement:2005). This was derived or grew from the initial collaboration with Whitehead. According to this view, all truths are dependent upon layer of atomic facts (Ibid). He proposed that elements of certain theories be breakdown into simple forms (â€Å"atoms†). Russell’s idea also suggests that atomic propositions are logically independent with each other. Logical atomism is possible when formal logic provides the rules by which we can translate ideal language into their simple, atomic facts and put them in a meaningful context. Upon seeing Russell’s discussion, one of the greatest analytic philosopher has also something say about logic and about reference in relation to truth. The Early Wittgenstein ( He was called as such because the later Wittgenstein in the Philosophical Investigation totally abandoned his assumptions in this early writing), published his known book, Tractatus Logico-Philosopicus which became an a logical piece which explains the metaphysical world. This book was closely linked with Bertrand Russell’s philosophy because it tries to continue some of his ideas and at the same time serve as a reaction to it. The book basically address the problem of the world and language in philosophy. Wittgenstein (1922) believed that the world is represented by thought. His conception of the world is different with the logical atomists in a way that he believed it is made up of facts instead of objects. Wittgenstein’s idea of the world is unique because he considered thoughts and propositions as pictures of the world. Wittgenstein’s investigation in the Tractatus serves to find the limits of the world, thought and language (Ibid). As a consequence of this, he believed that one can only represents through meaningful propositions factual state of affairs that are capable of being pictured. Although he made it clear that the pictorial representations of the world show themselves through logical propositions but they cannot be said. Language therefore serve its function in showing or picturing this facts. Facts according to him are constructed in complex one thus making what one called the ‘world. ’ It must be said that in the Ordinary language tradition, a different Wittgenstein, proposed philosophical investigations with ordinary language and not some theory still trapped within the muddles of philosophy. Wittgenstein for instance would say, that instead of worrying yourself about the meaning of life and trying to look for some explanations (either logical or theological), one should understand how does s/he lives her/his life and is s/he happy in the process. Also in the latter Wittgenstein it was shown his theory the need for individuals to speak the same language. This was advanced in his idea on â€Å"language games’ whereby, if one would look the world, one would realized that there are various use and context of language. That an individual before engaging into the language game should first need to know the rules to be in context. This view is quiet similar to Austin’s theory in the Philosophy of Language entitled, â€Å"How to do things with Words. In as much as it is interesting to discussed the ordinary language theory in detail as part of the analytic tradition, it would be systematic to go back to the discussion of analytical philosophy in general. Going back to Russell’s theory, its contribution to analytic philosophy is that it became an offshoot for the development Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus that further lead to other strands of analytic philosophy. Based from the previous discussion one would realized why analytical philosophy is linked with philosophy of language. Some accounts also called analytical philosophy as ordinary language philosophy but not all thinkers are comfortable to used the terms interchangeably . Russell and Wittgenstein tried to solve some of the problems in philosophy by using logical analysis that would analyze the role of language to reality. The used of language will able the thinkers to solve philosophical problems. This was explicitly mentioned by Wittgenstein in the Tractatus, â€Å"the limits of my language means the limits of my world. † As an overview of the Analytical philosophy, the individual must realized that even though some philosophers adhere to the need for formal and logical analysis, others prefer to used ordinary language theory. Within the Analytic tradition there are various forms such as logical positivism, logical atomism, and ordinary language philosophy. Philosophers are even divided based on these strands. We can only hope that maybe in the future language could provide meanings that would enlighten us in our search for knowledge.