Frege, Misc

Bobzien’s reply to a defamatory blogpost on her essay ‘Frege plagiarized the Stoics’ in which she is accused among other things of plagiarism (!), and deliberate deception, and which contains a large number of falsehoods. (This reply is a minor contribution to the discussion of 'Frege plagiarized the Stoics', simply setting the record straight. It contains no important philosophical content whatsoever.).

Gottlob Frege war einst ein kaum bekannter intellektueller Einzelgänger. Als er verstarb, nahm niemand davon Notiz. Er schien vergessen. Doch kein Vierteljahrhundert später ist er der größte Logiker seit Aristoteles, sein philosophisches Werk von epochaler Bedeutsamkeit. Aus dem akademischen Außenseiter wurde ein Heroe der Wissenschaftsgeschichte. Wie kam es indes zu Freges posthumer Geburt? Die vorliegende Untersuchung erzählt diese außergewöhnliche Geschichte in all ihren faszinierenden Details und hält so manche Überraschung bereit. Die bibliographischen Koordinaten JSL 1(4), 135 führen zum Schlüssel des (...) Rätsels. (shrink)

G9–84–92–93–02. Diesen fünfstelligen Schlüssel kennt der philosophische Kanon. Mit ihm erschließt sich das intellektuelle Wirken Gottlob Freges, verfasst in der Sprache der Logik. Doch wer kennt die Folge 82–87–99–06–08? Mit ihr öffnet sich der Subtext im Leben des Logikers, verfasst in der Sprache der Rhetorik. Die polemische Tonspur wurde zur autobiographischen Textur eines streitbaren Daseins wider den Zeitgeist, das mit einem Missverständnis seinen Anfang nahm und im Schweigen endete. Es ist dies die Geschichte Freges im Schatten seiner epochalen Werke. Hier (...) wird sie erzählt. (shrink)

Wer kennt GOTTLOB FREGE? Nur wenige verbinden mit seinem Namen einen der groaten Logiker aller Zeiten, ohne dessen "Logik von Funktion und Argument" die heutige Computertechnik kaum denkbar ist. Frege fuhlte sich zeitlebens zu seiner Heimat im Norden Deutschlands hingezogen. In Wismar verbrachte er seine Kindheit und in Bad Kleinen, in unmittelbarer Nahe, seinen Lebensabend. Das im Jahre 2000 gegrundete Gottlob-Frege-Zentrum der Hochschule Wismar organisierte ihm zu Ehren im Mai 2013 in seiner Geburtsstadt eine internationale Konferenz, an der Forscher aus (...) der mathematischen Grundlagenforschung und der Analytischen Philosophie teilnahmen. Im Konferenzband erfahren Sie von bekannten Wissenschaftlern u.a., begin{itemize} item was Frege zur Entwicklung der Mathematik, Logik und Philosophie leistete, item welche wissenschaftlichen Auffassungen Frege vertrat und welche er scharf kritisierte, item mit welchen bekannten Wissenschaftlern Frege korrespondierte und wer sein Werk fortsetzte oder in Frage stellte, item was wir heute noch aus Freges Arbeiten lernen konnen. (shrink)

Para Frege, o erro de base do psicologismo é a sua concepção de sujeito, que se concentra no princípio de que meus únicos objetos são conteúdos imanentes da consciência. Entretanto, essa tese não é meramente falsa, mas também refutável. A refutação da mesma aparece, não obstante, tardiamente em Der Gedanke. É esse o sentido último da crítica do idealismo oferecida neste texto. Ela é um passo necessário e imprescindível para assegurar a possibilidade de que captemos pensamentos, possibilidade com a qual (...) se ocupa boa parte do artigo de 1918. (shrink)

Gottlob Frege (1848-1925) has been called ‘the undisputed father of analytic philosophy’ and ‘the most important logician since Aristotle.’ Even if his impact on philosophy were to extend no further than his decisive influence on leading early twentieth-century thinkers of the stature of Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein and Rudolf Carnap, that alone would assure him a notable place in the history of modern philosophy. Nevertheless, there are other areas of Frege’s intellectual activity that have largely escaped the attention of his (...) commentators. One of these is his seldom-noticed attempt late in life to write about political theology. In this reconstruction of Frege’s view, based on a context-sensitive close reading of his fragmentary writing on theology, I document Frege’s commitment to a highly politicized conception of theology’s public role. This conception is infused with the ideology of Germany’s Far-Right völkisch (pan-German ethnic-nationalist) movement and steeped in the political strife of early Weimar-era Germany. Frege’s interest in theology was evidently rooted not so much in conventionally spiritual concerns as in the decidedly innerweltlich desire to help turn the tide in German politics in favor of the ultranationalist Far Right. His theology was, accordingly, a political theology of völkisch, antisemitic, and anti-socialist nationalism. (shrink)

I critically discuss Dale Jacquette’s Frege: A Philosophical Biography. First, I provide a short overview of Jacquette’s book. Second, I evaluate Jacquette’s interpretation of Frege’s three major works, Begriffsschrift, Grundlagen der Arithmetik and Grundgesetze der Arithmetik; and conclude that the author does not faithfully represent their content. Finally, I offer some technical and general remarks.

Gottlob Frege (1848-1925) und Ludwig Wittgenstein gelten als die geistigen Väter der analytischen Philosophie. Das wissenschaftliche Schaffen Gottlob Freges hat wie kein anderes nach Aristoteles die Logik in ihrer theoretischen Erscheinungsform und in ihrer praktischen Relevanz grundlegend verändert. Seine logisch-semantischen Untersuchungen haben noch immer auf Philosophie und Sprachwissenschaft großen Einfluß. Doch wer war dieser Mann, der die Geistesgeschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts mitgestaltete, dessen Rückführung logischen Schließens auf mechanisch kontrollierte Elementarschritte den Weg zur Logik der elektronischen Datenverarbeitung eröffnete? Zwar gibt es (...) Arbeiten, die sich mit besonderen Seiten oder speziellen Zeiten von Freges Leben beschäftigen, eine umfassende Biographie über ihn gab es jedoch bislang nicht. Diese Lücke schließt Lothar Kreisers Buch. Freges Leben wird biographisch zunächst in dem Kontext der Stadt und Stadtschule Wismar, dann in dem der Stadt und der Universität Jena eingebettet rekonstruiert. Regional übergreifende politische und wissenschaftliche Vorgänge werden einbezogen, um verbürgten konkreten Ereignissen aus Freges Leben einen für das Verstehen tieferen und festeren Rahmen zu geben. Seine Mitwirkung in Kommisionen und Gesellschaften kommt ebenso zur Sprache wie die Wurzeln seines wissenschaftlichen Lebenswerkes, seine Beziehungen zu anderen Persönlichkeiten und deren Bestrebungen, aber auch der Wandel in seinen politischen Überzeugungen. Die Biographie setzt keine speziellen Fachkenntnisse, nur Interesse an einem spannenden Abschnitt der Wissenschaftsgeschichte, fokussiert auf die Person Gottlob Frege, voraus. "Gottlob Frege: Leben - Werk - Zeit" ist Biographie und Millieustudie zugleich. (shrink)

Volume 41, Issue 2, May 2020, Page 199-202.

Gottlob Frege is one of the founding figures of analytic philosophy, whose contributions to logic, philosophical semantics, philosophy of language, and philosophy of mathematics set the agenda for future generations of theorists in these and related areas. Dale Jacquette's lively and incisive biography charts Frege's life from its beginnings in small-town north Germany, through his student days in Jena, to his development as an enduringly influential thinker. Along the way Jacquette considers Frege's ground-breaking Begriffschrift, in which he formulated his 'ideal (...) logical language', his magisterial Grundgesetze der Arithmetik, and his complex relation to thinkers including Husserl and especially Russell, whose Paradox had such drastic implications for Frege's logicism. Jacquette concludes with a thoughtful assessment of Frege's legacy. His rich and informative biography will appeal to all who are interested in Frege's philosophy. (shrink)

Gottlob Frege lehrte 44 Jahre in Jena als Dozent der Mathematik, aber bisher ist sehr wenig über seine beruflichen, philosophischen und persönlichen Umstände in dieser Zeit bekannt. Dieser Band stellt den Stand der Forschung auf diesem Gebiet vor: Er beginnt mit der Frage, wie Frege aus seiner Heimatstadt Wismar in Mecklenburg überhaupt nach Jena kam (durch Vermittlung des Mathematiklehrers Leo Sachse, später ein Beispielname in Freges Schriften), und setzt sich mit der Frage fort, wie er sich dort im Umfeld der (...) Universität etablierte (mit seinem Mathematikerkollegen J. Thomae und im Umkreis seines Lehrers und Förderers Ernst Abbe, des Gründers der Zeiss-Stiftung). Beleuchtet wird Freges Stellung in der Mathematik seiner Zeit, aber auch sein Verhältnis zu seinem philosophischen Kollegen R. Eucken, das mit zwei erstmals gedruckten Grußkarten Freges dokumentiert wird. Erstmals dargestellt wird auch, wie Frege zu seinem Adoptivsohn (und späteren Erben) Alfred kam und was er für ihn getan hat. Weitere Themen sind Freges Rezeption des Mathematikers Hankel; einige Mißverständnisse des Neukantianers Natorp bezüglich Freges Definition der Zahl; der Gegenstand der "Grundgesetze der Arithmetik", sowie die ursprüngliche Absicht, die Frege mit seiner berühmten Unterscheidung von Sinn und Bedeutung verfolgte. Der Band enthält zahlreiche bisher unbekannte Dokumente zu Freges Leben und Werk, darunter amtliche Schreiben Freges, zwei Schreiben an Eucken, drei Briefe Thomaes, in denen dieser über Frege berichtet, sowie einen Klappentext von 1903, der drei Schriften Freges anzeigt. Eine umfassende, kommentierte Forschungsbibliographie zu Frege und seinem Jenaer Umfeld beschließt den Band. Die Herausgeber lehren Philosophie an der Universität Jena. (shrink)

Desde el punto de vista de Frege, la expresión "teoría formal de la aritmética" puede designar dos concepciones muy diferentes, de las cuales él defendió una con tanto ardor como combatió a la otra. La segunda es la concepción formalista vulgar, según la cual, en aritmética "los signos son vacíos y constituyen ellos mismos los números. La primera es la que atribuye a la aritmética un carácter "formal", en el sentido de "puramente lógico" que la distingue radicalmente de la geometría (...) y la aproxima a la lógica propiamente dicha. (shrink)

The doctrine on predicative judgment sustained by Frege and Husserl reopens a discussion already present in the philosophical tradition: Does predicative judgment consist in a “composition” of concepts made by the understanding, or in an “assent” to a propositional content? For Frege, the “thought”, i. e., the sense of the proposition, as expresion of the judgment, presents such unity that it cannot be explained by a “composition” of previous elements; Husserl on the contrary, sustains that, although the propositional content of (...) judgments in composed judgments do present a unity, in the case of the simple predicative judgment this unity arises due to a “synthesis”. Thus, for Frege the act of judging consists in “recognizing the truth-value of a thought”, which agrees with the doctrine of an “assent” to a propositional content. For Husserl, on the contrary, the basic act of judging consists in a “synthesis” of basic representations, which is very close to Aristotle’s doctrine. (shrink)

In 1919, when his Logisch-Philosophische Abhandlung (Tractatus Logico-Phi-losophicus), was finished but still unpublished, Wittgenstein sent the manuscript to Frege, and, as a consequence of that, they exchanged several fairly polemic letters in 1919 – 1920. Only Frege’s letters were preserved. The letters are highly compressed in content, and offer an interesting insight in how, mostly critically, one of the authors of whom Wittgenstein held highest esteem, thought about the content, style, and organisation of the manuscript. At the same time, we (...) can get some impression from Frege’s letters how Wittgenstein reacted to his initial letter addressing the Tractatus, and how the subsequent exchange went. In this paper, I offer several observations concerning their exchange, and I compare it to the parallel exchange on the same matter between Wittgenstein and Russell. (shrink)

The similarity between logic and semantics of the Stoics and Frege has long been known, and it can be explained in various ways. In 2021, Susane Bobzien published a work in which she explains this similarity rather surprisingly: she hypothesizes that Frege generously helped himself with the foundations of Stoic logic as it was published in the first volume of History of Logic in the West by Carl Prantl. However, this hypothesis encounters various problems. The key point of the whole (...) accusation is founded on the formulation of a general propo-sition in language using implication and anaphora, which Frege supposedly took from the Stoics, although in Prantl’s text there is only one example of a sentence with this structure. On the contrary, there are many examples of such sentences in contemporary professional (e.g. legal) texts. Many examples of semantic simi-larities that Bobzien presents are based only on the similarities between isolated concepts; however, that is regularly the case for such concepts with the same conceptual basis. Bobzien presents a significant number of matches only on the basis of results that could allegedly be inferred from the texts. However, this cannot be considered a proof of plagiarism. Bobzien does not consider many sources for the continuity of interpretation such as the so-called hypothetical syllogism found in available textbooks of logic. Last but not least, her claims do not consider many differences between Stoic and Frege’s logic. All this leads us to the conclusion that Bobzien does not present sufficient facts and connections between them that would confirm her hypothesis about Frege’s plagiarism of the Stoic logic: Frege simply was not a plagiarist. (shrink)

In recent years, it has been acknowledged increasingly that the relationship between analytic and continental philosophy is one of complementarity rather than opposition, as previously often assumed. In this essay I will argue that, in fact, early analytic philosophy has its roots in the tradition of continental philosophy. The essay will focus on Hermann Lotze's influence on Frege and on Frege's relationship to the Neo‐Kantians Otto Liebmann and Wilhelm Windelband. It will provide new evidence for the claim that Frege's philosophy (...) should be seen as belonging to the tradition of Neo‐Kantianism and, along the way, exhibit the continental roots of Frege's context principle. (shrink)

Frege and Russell were the most significant influences on the young Wittgenstein, but the relative weight of their impacts is less clear. Some interpreters have claimed for Frege an influence far surpassing that of Russell. I cast doubt on this claim, by reviewing the evidence we have of Wittgenstein's pre‐Tractatus understanding of Frege. Wittgenstein did eventually come to some views more like Frege's than Russell's; I suggest it was his own thinking rather than direct influence from Frege that led him (...) in this direction. (shrink)

It is well known that Frege and his writings were an important influence on Wittgenstein. There is no agreement, however, on the nature and scope of this influence. In this paper, I clarify the situation in three related ways: by tracing Frege's and Wittgenstein's actual interactions, i.e., their face‐to‐face meetings and their correspondence between 1911 and 1920; by documenting Wittgenstein's continued study of Frege's writings, until the very end of his life in 1951; and by constructing, on that basis, a (...) new framework for understanding the themes that connect Wittgenstein to Frege, both in his early and his later works. (shrink)

The paper discusses Husserl’s criticism of Frege in Philosophy of Arithmetic (1891) and then his later attitude towards logicism as expressed in Logical Investigations (1900-01). In Philosophy of Arithmetic Husserl holds that logicists offer needless and artificial definitions of notions such as equivalence and number. Frege criticized Husserl’s approach in Philosophy of Arithmetic as psychological, thus shifting the focus of the debate away from logicism. However, Frege’s criticism could be seen to lead Husserl to his later transcendental phenomenological concept of (...) correlation and, with it, to a more developed criticism of logicism. In this regard the division of labor between mathematics and philosophy established in Prolegomena to the Logical Investigations (1900) is central. It implies that in Husserl’s view formal methods fail to shed philosophical insight into the essence of mathematics. In his picture the central notions in need of philosophical clarification are, instead of number and quantity, the notions that are central to abstract structural mathematics. Contrary to Frege who can only elucidate the primitive concepts, Husserl engages in detailed description of their constitution. (shrink)

European Journal of Philosophy, Volume 29, Issue 4, Page 988-1009, December 2021.

Frege says, at the end of a discussion of formalism in the Foundations of Arithmetic, that his own foundational program “could be called formal” but is “completely different” from the view he has just criticized. This essay examines Frege’s relationship to Hermann Hankel, his main formalist interlocutor in the Foundations, in order to make sense of these claims. The investigation reveals a surprising result: Frege’s foundational program actually has quite a lot in common with Hankel’s. This undercuts Frege’s claim that (...) his own view is completely different from Hankel’s formalism, and motivates a closer examination of where the differences lie. On the interpretation offered here, Frege shares important parts of the formalist perspective, but differs in recognizing a kind of content for arithmetical terms which can only be made available via proof from prior postulates. (shrink)

At the turn of the century, Gottlob Frege and Edmund Husserl both participated in the discussion concerning the foundations of logic and mathematics. Since the 1960s, comparisons have been made between Frege's semantic views and Husserl's theory of intentional acts. In quite recent years, new approaches to the two philosophers' views have appeared. This collection of articles opens with the first English translation of Dagfinn Føllesdal's early classic on Husserl and Frege of 1958. The book brings together a number of (...) new contributions by well-known authors and gives a survey of recent developments in the field. It shows that Husserl's thought is coming to occupy a central role in the philosophy of logic and mathematics, as well as in the philosophy of mind and cognitive science. The work is primarily meant for philosophers, especially for those working on the problems of language, logic, mathematics, and mind. It can also be used as a textbook in advanced courses in philosophy. (shrink)

By way of a close reading of Boole and Frege’s solutions to the same logical problem, we highlight an underappreciated aspect of Boole’s work—and of its difference with Frege’s better-known approach—which we believe sheds light on the concepts of ‘calculus’ and ‘mechanization’ and on their history. Boole has a clear notion of a logical problem; for him, the whole point of a logical calculus is to enable systematic and goal-directed solution methods for such problems. Frege’s Begriffsschrift, on the other hand, (...) is a visual tool to scrutinize concepts and inferences, and is a calculus only in the thin sense that every possible transition between sentences is fully and unambiguously specified in advance. While Frege’s outlook has dominated much of philosophical thinking about logical symbolism, we believe there is value—particularly in light of recent interest in the role of notations in mathematics and logic—in reviving Boole’s idea of an intrinsic link between, as he put it, a ‘calculus’ and a ‘directive method’ to solve problems. (shrink)

Il s’agit dans cet article de proposer une interprétation du projet logique à travers une discussion entre Hegel et Frege. Au-delà des divergences bien connues concernant, entre autres, la formalisation du langage et le rapport aux mathématiques, et après avoir souligné quelques points de convergences parfois remarqués, notamment la critique du psychologisme, nous voulons montrer ici comment la logique se construit, et comment cette construction implique une certaine productivité de la forme logique. Le fait que la forme logique ne puisse (...) pas être abordée de manière immédiate, dans une évidence, conduit à une conception de celle-ci comme développement. Derrière cette présentation « organique » de la logique se joue en réalité une certaine compréhension de la forme dans laquelle celle-ci se produit elle-même dans son explicitation. Cette exigence d’autonomie est comprise à partir d’une analyse, chez Frege, de l’autonomie du nombre. Mais la réponse hégélienne sur le statut de celui-ci nous permet de souligner la contradiction que le nombre abrite. C’est à ce titre que nous pouvons rendre compte, de manière plus détaillée, non seulement du processus d’élaboration de la logique, mais également de la production des contenus : en comprenant le rapport réflexif de la forme comme instauration de la contradiction. (shrink)

Há muitos pontos de concordância entre Frege e os neokantianos. Isso vale especialmente para os representantes do neokantismo da teoria do valor ou do Sudoeste alemão na tradição de Hermann Lotze. Não discutiremos aqui todos os aspectos dessa proximidade; de acordo com o tema que propomos, ficaremos restritos à filosofia da matemática. A primeira parte do artigo tratará da relação entre aritmética e geometria, mostrando surpreendentes semelhanças entre Frege e o neokantiano Otto Liebmann. A segunda parte discutirá as diferentes recepções (...) do logicismo de Frege por Jonas Cohn, Paul Natorp, Heinrich Rickert, Ernst Cassirer e Bruno Bauch. (shrink)

Kant's claim that arithmetical truths are synthetic is famously contradicted by Frege, who considers them to be analytical. It may seem that this is a mere dispute about linguistic labels, since both Kant and Frege agree that arithmetical truths are a priori and informative, and, therefore, it is only a matter of how one chooses to call them. I argue that the choice between calling arithmetic “synthetic” or “analytic” has a deeper significance. I claim that the dispute is not a (...) merely linguistic one, but one involving the status of arithmetic as a science. Namely, it is a dispute about what truths are appropriate to use in grounding a scientific discipline. I interpret Frege's critique of Kant as being mainly about the lack of distinction between the context of justification and the context of discovery. (shrink)

In this paper I examine two substantial interpretations of Wittgenstein’s criticisms of Frege’s conception of logic. One is based on Frege’s rejection of psychologism and alleges that this rejection engenders a tension that is resolved in the Tractatus. The other is based on the claim that there are patterns of inference involving what are now known as propositional attitude ascriptions that Frege’s conception of logic is not equipped to handle. I show that neither of these interpretations present a compelling criticism (...) of Frege. I then argue that Wittgenstein inherited from Frege the ideas of affirmation, denial, and the “opposite” of a thought, but came to see that these conflict with Frege’s conception of negation as a truth-function. This leads to the Grundgedanke of the Tractatus: neither negation nor any other “logical constant” is a representative in our picturing of the world. (shrink)

In contemporary historical studies, Peano is usually included in the logical tradition pioneered by Frege. In this paper, I shall first demonstrate that Frege and Peano independently developed a similar way of using logic for the rigorous expression and proof of mathematical laws. However, I shall then suggest that Peano also used his mathematical logic in such a way that anticipated a formalisation of mathematical theories which was incompatible with Frege’s conception of logic.

In this article I explore some implications of the correspondence that went on between Ludwig Wittgenstein and the logician and mathematician Gottlob Frege. Part of this exchange was focused on the envisaged publication of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, and on the philosophical or literary character of that work. The problem discussed concerned the question of whether the Tractatus should be seen not as a scientific but as an artistic achievement. My first goal is to present what, given Frege’s writings, his phrase (...) “an artistic rather than a scientific achievement” could be understood to mean in terms of the Tractatus itself. Secondly, I seek to determine the extent to which traces of Frege’s understanding of such terms as “mock thoughts,” “fiction,” “elucidation,” “paintings” and “colouring” are to be found in the language of the Tractatus. This should then make it possible to show how Wittgenstein’s work, viewed from a Fregean perspective, can be seen as furnishing a logic and semantics not only for the languages of logic and natural science, but also for something that is “an artistic rather than a scientific achievement”, while also indicating that the content of the Tractatus as a whole could not have been captured independently of the unified form Wittgenstein himself gave it. (shrink)

Wittgenstein’s attitude to writing philosophy is an important part of his complex legacy from Frege. Even the frequently misconstrued phrase, “Philosophie dürfte man eigentlich nur dichten”, is part of that legacy. How should we actually render that sentence in English? How is the idea that Dichtung is a necessary aspect of philosophical method rooted in thoughts that ultimately find their way back to Frege? Where do we find Dichtung in the so-called private language argument? How is Wittgenstein’s view of the (...) role of Dichtung in philosophy related to his appreciation of humor in philosophizing? What is the role of humor in Frege’s work? How does Wilhelm Busch in Eduards Traum illustrate the philosophical significance of humorous Dichtung? What is the link between Dichtung and craftsmanship in writing philosophy for Wittgenstein? These are the central issues that the article addresses. (shrink)

This paper argues for the centrality of expression for the project of phenomenology. It shows, first, that the concept of expression grows out of the debate with Frege concerning meaning that led to Husserl’s distinct phenomenological project. Specifically, expression is Husserl’s first attempt to more rigorously define ‘sense’ as the essential connection between subjective acts of meaning and ‘objective’ meanings. This account of expression is then taken up in Husserl’s later work on spirit, which thereby makes expression central to Husserl’s (...) entire analysis of the lifeworld. Insofar as Husserl saw phenomenology growing out of his dispute with Frege on meaning, and working toward the ability to clarify the sense of all scientific knowledge, expression names the promise inherent to phenomenology itself, that which defines the very project of phenomenology. (shrink)

This article presents and compares Frege’s and Husserl’s conceptions of sense, also taking into account their 1891 and 1906 correspondence. It is argued that while the similarities between their views speak in favour of a Fregean interpretation of Husserl’s notion of noematic sense, there are also important differences. With regard to the latter, it is argued that Husserl’s view yields a more general criterion of propositional difference and also provides a more detailed conception of the use of indexicals and non-descriptive (...) singular terms, and of their reference. In this context, Husserl’s conceptions of constitution and genetic constitution analysis, respectively, are invoked and interpreted in terms of the epistemic notion of processing mental files or individual “concepts”. (shrink)

Während die Bedeutung Freges für die Philosophie der Gegenwart, soweit sich diese der analytischen Philosophie verpflichtet fühlt, allgemeine Anerkennung gefunden hat, ist seine Stellung innerhalb der eigenen Zeit noch weitgehend unaufgeklärt geblieben. So herrscht die Auffassung vor, Frege habe seine Ideen ganz aus sich selbst oder geradezu im Gegensatz zur deutschen philosophischen Tradition seiner Zeit gewonnen. Bei genauerer Textanalyse weisen Freges Schriften dagegen vielfältige Beziehungen zur zeitgenössischen Logik, Erkenntnistheorie, Sprachphilosophie und Philosophie der Mathematik auf, so dass bei ihm von einem (...) Bruch mit der kontinentalen Philosophie nicht die Rede sein kann. Weil die historischen Voraussetzungen unberücksichtigt geblieben sind, ist ein unzutreffendes Bild von Freges Einsichten entstanden. Dieses Bild wird durch die Entfaltung des historischen Kontextes korrigiert. Bestimmend ist dabei ein problemorientierter Zugang, der sich systematischer Bewertungen und Weiterführungen nicht enthält. (shrink)

In this book, Michael Potter offers a fresh and compelling portrait of the birth and first several decades of analytic philosophy, one of the most important periods in philosophy’s long history. He focuses on the period between the publication of Gottlob Frege’s _Begriffsschrift _in 1879 and Frank Ramsey’s death in 1930. Potter--one of the most influential writers on late 19 th and early 20 th century philosophy--presents a deep but accessible account of the break with Absolute Idealism and Neo-Kantianism, specifically, (...) and more generally with many of the metaphysical preoccupations of philosophy’s preceding history. Potter’s focus is on philosophical logic and philosophy of mathematics, but he also relies heavily on important issues in metaphysics and meta-ethics to complete his story. The book provides an essential starting point for any student or philosopher attempting to understand Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, and Ramsey as well as their interactions and their intellectual milieux. It will also be of interest to a great many philosophers today who want to illuminate the problems they work on by better knowing their origins. KEY FEATURES: 1. Discusses the interconnections of Frege, Russell and Wittgenstein—founding thinkers in the history of analytic philosophy—and also brings the neglected Frank Ramsey into this conversation, providing a unique focus and depth to an introductory text 2. Increases the general awareness of the importance of the history of analytic philosophy for today’s non-historical debates, giving the book appeal in all areas of analytic philosophy 3. Written by one of the most influential philosophers of logic and writers in the history of analytic philosophy 4. Written for upper-level undergraduates, guaranteeing widespread accessibility 5. Includes coverage of topics and issues neglected in competing publications, including Russell’s _Principles_, solipsism in the _Tractatus_, and the contributions of Frank Ramsey 6. Emphasizes the chronological development of authors’ views so as to provide a better understanding of their motivation. (shrink)

ABSTRACT This paper reveals David Hilbert’s position in the philosophy of mathematics, circa 1900, to be a form of non-eliminative structuralism, predating his formalism. I argue that Hilbert withstands the pressing objections put to him by Frege in the course of the Frege-Hilbert controversy in virtue of this early structuralist approach. To demonstrate that this historical position deserves contemporary attention I show that Hilbertian structuralism avoids a recent wave of objections against non-eliminative structuralists to the effect that they cannot distinguish (...) between structurally identical but importantly distinct mathematical objects, such as the complex roots of $-1$. (shrink)

Existe en Frege no solo una concepción intencional de la conciencia, sino también uma concepción motivacional de su causalidad, esto es, Frege concibe la idea de una causalidade específica, diferente de la científico-natural, y que tiene como presupuesto la existência de estados intencionales. En tal sentido, existe un interesante punto de contacto entre Frege y Husserl.

Volume 40, Issue 4, November 2019, Page 403-406.