{"id":891,"date":"2019-11-20T19:06:33","date_gmt":"2019-11-20T19:06:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/seminar-series-in-analytic-philosophy-session-8\/"},"modified":"2019-11-20T19:06:53","modified_gmt":"2019-11-20T19:06:53","slug":"seminar-series-in-analytic-philosophy-session-8","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/seminar-series-in-analytic-philosophy-session-8\/","title":{"rendered":"Seminar Series in Analytic Philosophy, Session 8"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Jos\u00e9 Manuel Mestre<\/p>\n<p>LANCOG &amp; University of Stirling<\/p>\n<h6><strong><em>Whence the Paralysis?<\/em><\/strong><\/h6>\n<p><strong>22 November 2019, 16:00<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Sala Mattos Rom\u00e3o <\/strong>(Departamento de Filosofia)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Abstract:<\/strong> In the spring of 1913, Wittgenstein presented Russell with an objection to his multiple relation theory of judgement that supposedly \u2018paralysed\u2019 him. The fact that there is no detailed record of the objection has led to a great deal of speculation concerning its precise meaning. Commentators have typically assumed the objection to be valid, given its impact on Russell. Yet interpretations divide in a way that suggests a sort of dilemma: roughly, internal objections are weak, strong objections are external. One might therefore want to disentangle the question of what exactly Wittgenstein\u2019s point was, both from what Russell took it to be, and from what the intrinsic demerits of Russell\u2019s theory are. Here I\u2019ll review some of these interpretations, and then raise a different objection that rather relates to Ramsey\u2019s own insightful discussion of the multiple relation theory.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jos\u00e9 Manuel Mestre LANCOG &amp; University of Stirling Whence the Paralysis? 22 November 2019, 16:00 Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa Sala Mattos Rom\u00e3o (Departamento de Filosofia) Abstract: In the spring of 1913, Wittgenstein presented Russell with an objection to his multiple relation theory of judgement that supposedly \u2018paralysed\u2019 him. The fact that there is no [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"","activitypub_status":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-891","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/891","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=891"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/891\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=891"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=891"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=891"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}