e undetermined constituents are determined.(Russell 221) For example, when one says that x is y, one really means "If x, then x is y." This is an example of a propositional function. A propositional function is necessarily the case, possibly the case, or never the case. Necessity only is applicable to propositional functions. True and false only is applicable to propositions, and the two are not the same to Russell (Russell 222).To clear this up, let me use for example the sentence, "God exists." Russell translates that to mean, "If x exists, then x is God." He calls this a possible propositional function. When one claims that God exists, one can apparently mean that if God exists, then God exists. He says that "God exists" is not a proposition because it has not been determined whether there is a God or not. If one wants to change the sentence to "God necessarily exists," Russell translates that to mean, "If x exists, then x is God will always be the case." In no way, then, can one really say if God necessarily exists, and to argue "God necessarily exists" is true would be fallacious because only propositions can be true.The approach that Russell and Kant take is rather dogmatic and cannot amount to a proof for their position that there are no necessary existential propositions. The ontological argument is one argument that purports to demonstrate the necessary existence of something, and one can be sure that Anselm did not mean when he said, "God exists" that it was a propositional function that is possible. Russell and Kant assume that all existential propositions are contingent while Anselm assumes that there can be necessary existential propositions. The question remains what the rational justifications are for these assumptions. Russell’s distinction between propositional functions and propositions amounts to question begging if meant to be an argument.On the other hand, Anselm’s argument is incapable of meeting the ob...
