"Every philosophical problem, when it is subjected to the necessary analysis and justification, is found either to be not really philosophical at all, or else to be, in the sense in which we are using the word, logical"
About this Quote
Russell is doing a philosophical magic trick: he shrinks philosophy until it fits inside logic, then acts surprised when the leftovers look like bad labeling. The line comes with a quietly combative intent. He is drawing a border checkpoint for ideas: if a “philosophical problem” survives serious analysis, it turns out to be a problem about inference, meaning, and structure - the things logic can regiment. If it doesn’t survive, it was never philosophy; it was muddle, metaphysics-as-mist, or a confusion produced by language.
The subtext is a critique of philosophy’s temptations. People love grand questions that feel deep because they’re ill-posed: What is the Absolute? Do we have free will? Russell suggests that much of this “depth” is just conceptual fog. Submit the question to demands for justification - define terms, expose assumptions, show what would count as an answer - and the romantic aura collapses. What remains is either empirical (and should be handed to science) or logical (and should be clarified, not sermonized).
Context matters: Russell is writing from the early analytic tradition, alongside Frege and in conversation with Moore, reacting against British Idealism and the heavy metaphysical systems of the 19th century. He’s also anticipating the later Wittgensteinian idea that many philosophical knots are really linguistic knots. The rhetorical force is its prosecutorial certainty: philosophy is not a realm of special mysteries, but a discipline of cleanup. It’s an austere vision, but also a democratic one - insisting that intellectual authority comes from clarity, not cosmic vibes.
The subtext is a critique of philosophy’s temptations. People love grand questions that feel deep because they’re ill-posed: What is the Absolute? Do we have free will? Russell suggests that much of this “depth” is just conceptual fog. Submit the question to demands for justification - define terms, expose assumptions, show what would count as an answer - and the romantic aura collapses. What remains is either empirical (and should be handed to science) or logical (and should be clarified, not sermonized).
Context matters: Russell is writing from the early analytic tradition, alongside Frege and in conversation with Moore, reacting against British Idealism and the heavy metaphysical systems of the 19th century. He’s also anticipating the later Wittgensteinian idea that many philosophical knots are really linguistic knots. The rhetorical force is its prosecutorial certainty: philosophy is not a realm of special mysteries, but a discipline of cleanup. It’s an austere vision, but also a democratic one - insisting that intellectual authority comes from clarity, not cosmic vibes.
Quote Details
| Topic | Reason & Logic |
|---|
More Quotes by Bertrand
Add to List
