Ed Zalta's Version of Neo-Logicism: a friendly letter of complaint

In Hannes Leitgeb & Alexander Hieke (eds.), Reduction – Abstraction – Analysis. Ontos. pp. 11--305 (2009)

Abstract

In this short letter to Ed Zalta we raise a number of issues with regards to his version of Neo-Logicism. The letter is, in parts, based on a longer manuscript entitled “What Neo-Logicism could not be” which is in preparation. A response by Ed Zalta to our letter can be found on his website: http://mally.stanford.edu/publications.html (entry C3).

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,722

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-01-14

Downloads
155 (#77,863)

6 months
3 (#198,770)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Marcus Rossberg
University of Connecticut
Philip A. Ebert
University of Stirling

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Fruits of Logicism.Timothy Bays - 2000 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 41 (4):415-421.
Which Abstraction Principles Are Acceptable? Some Limitative Results.Øystein Linnebo & Gabriel Uzquiano - 2009 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (2):239-252.
Ernst Cassirer's Neo-Kantian Philosophy of Geometry.Jeremy Heis - 2011 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 19 (4):759 - 794.
Frege on Definitions.Sanford Shieh - 2008 - Philosophy Compass 3 (5):992-1012.
Russell’s Reasons for Logicism.Ian Proops - 2006 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 44 (2):267-292.