Analysis of Analysis

  • Joseph Agassi
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 401)


Kinds of analysis proliferate. The paradigm of analysis is mathematics; Newton spoke of scientific analysis; chemical analysis is a paradigm for that; psychologists speak of analyses; social scientists follow suit; linguists offer discourse analyses; critical analyses of Shakespeare’s sonnets are also familiar. The analysis nearest to, or identical with, Wittgenstein-style philosophy, is the most famous case in the field of foundations of mathematics: Russell’s 1905 view on definite descriptions. It has never left the agenda of analytic philosophy (Pelletier FJ, Linsky B: Russell vs. Frege on definite descriptions as singular terms. Griffin and Jacquette (eds), pp 40–64, 2009, conclusion). That explains his having found the discovery that language includes non-descriptive items downright silly.


  1. Adler, J. E. (1976). Evaluating global and local theories of induction. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1976(1), 212–223.Google Scholar
  2. Agassi, J. (1975). Science in flux. Dordrecht/Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anscombe, G. E. M. (1963). Semantic analysis by Paul Ziff. Mind, 72, 288–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ayer, A. J. (1936). Language, truth, and logic. Burwood: Royal Blind Society of New South Wales.Google Scholar
  5. Black, M. (1962). Models and metaphors: Studies in language and philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Caton, C. E. (1963). Philosophy and ordinary language. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cavell, S. (1979). The claim of reason. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dummett, M. (1978). Truth and other enigmas. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  9. Duncan, S. M. (2007). Analytic philosophy of religion: Its history since 1955. Tirril/Penrith: Humanities-Ebooks.Google Scholar
  10. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fann, K. T. (1967). Ludwig Wittgenstein: The man and his philosophy. New York: Dell Pub. Co.Google Scholar
  12. Frongia, G., & McGuinness, B. (1990). Wittgenstein: A bibliographical guide. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
  13. Gellner, E. ([1959] 2005). Words and things: An examination of, and an attack on, linguistic philosophy. London/New York: Routledge Classics . Foreword by Bertrand Russell, with a New Introduction by Ian Jarvie.Google Scholar
  14. Hall, R. (1959). Excluders. Analysis, 20, 1–7 Reprint, Caton 1963, 67–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hall, J. A., & Jarvie, I. C. (Eds.). (1996). The social philosophy of ernest Gellner. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  16. Haller, R. (1988). Questions on Wittgenstein. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  17. Hallett, G. L. (2008). Linguistic philosophy: The central story. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  18. Janik, A., & Toulmin, S. (1973). Wittgenstein’s Vienna. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  19. Jarvie, I. C. (1972). Concepts and society. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Joad, C. E. M. (1950). A critique of logical positivism. London: Victor Gollancz.Google Scholar
  21. Kripke, S. (1972). Naming and necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard. University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kripke, S. (1982). Wittgenstein on rules and private language: An elementary exposition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  23. Linsky, L. (Ed.). (1952). Semantics and the philosophy of language: A collection of readings. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  24. Markus, G. (2012). Language and production: A critique of the paradigms. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  25. McGuinness, B. (Ed.). (1985). Moritz Schlick. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  26. Monk, R. (2005). How to read Wittgenstein. New York/London: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  27. Morris, K., & Preti, C. (2015). How to read Moore’s “proof of an external world”. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy, 4. Google Scholar
  28. Pelletier, F. J., & Linsky B. (2009). Russell vs. Frege on definite descriptions as singular terms. In Griffin & Jacquette, 2009, pp. 40–64.Google Scholar
  29. Pole, D. (1958). The later philosophy of Wittgenstein: A short introduction, with an epilogue on John wisdom. London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  30. Russell, B. (1905). On denoting. Mind, 14, 479–493 reprinted in his 1956a, 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Russell, B. (1914). Our knowledge of the external world: As a field for scientific method in philosophy. London: G. Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  32. Russell, B. (1953). The cult of common usage. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 3, 303–307 Reprinted in Russell 1956b, 66–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Stegmüller, W. (2012). Collected papers on epistemology, philosophy of science and history, volume 2. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Warnock, G. J. (2013). John Langshaw Austin, a biographical sketch. In Fann 2013, pp. 3–21.Google Scholar
  36. Winch, P. (1958). The idea of a social science and its relation to philosophy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Wisdom, J. O. (1958). Review: The sceptic at bay: The problem of knowledge by A. J. Ayer. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 9, 159–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). The blue and Brown books. Pittsboro: InteLex Corp.Google Scholar
  39. Wittgenstein, L. (1975). Lectures on the foundations of mathematics, Cambridge, 1939. Edited by Cora diamond from the notes of R. G. Bosanquet, Norman Malcolm, Rush Rhees, & Yorick Smythies.Google Scholar
  40. Wittgenstein, L. (1980a). Culture and value (P. Winch, Trans., G. H. von Wright Ed., in collaboration with Heikki Nyman.Google Scholar
  41. Wittgenstein, L. (1980b). Wittgenstein’s lectures, Cambridge: 1930–1932. From the Notes of John King & Desmond Lee.Google Scholar
  42. Zemach, E. M. (1989). Wittgenstein on meaning. In McGuinness & Haller 1989, pp. 415–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ziff, P. (1960). Semantic analysis. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph Agassi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations