more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Quine extended Russell's theory for defining away definite descriptions, so that he could also define away names.
Gist of Idea
Quine extended Russell's defining away of definite descriptions, to also define away names
Source
report of Willard Quine (On What There Is [1948]) by Alex Orenstein - W.V. Quine Ch.2
Book Ref
Orenstein,Alex: 'W.V. Quine' [Princeton 2002], p.29
A Reaction
Quine also gets rid of universals and properties, so his ontology is squeezed from both the semantic and the metaphysical directions. Quine seems to be the key figure in modern ontology. If you want to expand it (E.J. Lowe), justify yourself to Quine.
| 7311 | The only genuine proper names are 'this' and 'that' [Russell] |
| 19321 | We might do without names, by converting them into predicates [Quine, by Kirkham] |
| 8455 | Canonical notation needs quantification, variables and predicates, but not names [Quine, by Orenstein] |
| 8456 | Quine extended Russell's defining away of definite descriptions, to also define away names [Quine, by Orenstein] |
| 9016 | Names are not essential, because naming can be turned into predication [Quine] |
| 9204 | Quine's arguments fail because he naively conflates names with descriptions [Fine,K on Quine] |