BY BERTRAND RUSSELL Published in: American Journal of Mathematics, vol.30(1908), pp. 222-262 Transcribed into hypertext by Burtzev B.I., Jul., 07, 2003 e-mail: bbi-math@narod.ru, site: http://bbi-math.narod.ru/ VIII. Descriptive Functions. EP.The functions hitherto considered have been propositional functions, with the exception of a few particular functions such R S. But the ordinary functions of mathematics, such as x2, sin x, log x, are not propositional. Functions of this kind always mean Уthe term having such-and-such a relation to x.Ф For this reason they may be called descriptive functions, because they describe a certain term by means of its relation to their argument. Thus ER.The general definition of a descriptive function is that is, УR*yФ is to mean Уthe term which has the relation R to y.Ф If there are several terms or none having the relation R to y, all propositions about R*y will be false. We put Here УE ! ( #x) (φx)Ф may be read Уthere is such a term as the x which satisfies φx,Ф or Уthe x which satisfies φx exists.Ф We have ES.From the above it appears that descriptive functions are obtained from relations. The relations now to be defined are chiefly important on account of the descriptive functions to which they give rise. Here Cnv is short for Уconverse.Ф It is the relation of a relation to its converse; e.g., of greater to less, of parentage to sonship, of preceding to following, etc. We have For a shorter notation, often more convenient, we put We want next a notation for the class of terms which have the relation R to y. For this purpose, we put whence Similarly we put whence whence ET.We want next the domain of R (i.e., the class of terms which have the relation R to something), the converse domain of R (i.e., the class of terms to which something has the relation R), and the field of R, which is the sum of the domain and the converse domain. For this purpose we define the relations of the domain, converse domain, and field, to R. The definitions are:
EU.We have, in virtue of the above definitions,
EV.We want next a notation for the relation, to a class α a contained in the domain of R, of the class of terms to which some member of α has the relation R, and also for the relation, to a class β contained in the converse domain of R, of the class of terms which have the relation R to some member of β. For the second of these we put So that Thus if R is the relation of father to son, and β is the class of Etonians, Rε*β will be the class Уfathers of Etonians,Ф if R is the relation Уless than,Ф and β is the class of proper fractions of the form 1 Ч 2-n for integral values of n, Rε*β will be the class of fractions less than some fraction of the form 1 Ч 2-n; i.e., Rε*β will be the class of proper fractions. The other relation mentioned above is (Rº )ε. EW.We put, as an alternative notation often more convenient, We put also EY.The product and sum of a class of classes are often required. They are defined as follows:
EZ.We need a notation for the class whose only member is x. Peano uses ιx, hence we shall use ι*x. Peano showed (what Frege also had emphasized) that this class can not be identified with x. With the usual view of classes, the need for such a distinction remains a mystery; but with the view set forth above, it becomes obvious. FA.We put whence and i.e., if α is a class which has only one member, then ιº*α is that one FB.For the class of classes contained in a given class, we put FC.We can now proceed to the consideration of cardinal and ordinal numbers, and of how they are affected by the doctrine of types. |