The Limits of Abstraction

Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 72 (1):223-232 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Kit Fine’s book is a study of abstraction in a quite precise sense which derives from Frege. In his Grundlagen, Frege contemplates defining the concept of number by means of what has come to be called Hume’s principle—the principle that the number of Fs is the same as the number of Gs just in case there is a one-to-one correspondence between the Fs and the Gs. Frege’s discussion is largely conducted in terms of another, similar but in some respects simpler, proposal—to define the concept of direction by laying down the principle that the direction of a line a is the same as that of line b if and only if lines a and b are parallel. Such principles have come to be known as abstraction principles. More generally, abstraction principles are ones of the shape: ∀α∀β ↔ α ≈ β), where ≈ is an equivalence relation on entities of the type over which α and β vary and, if the principle is acceptable, § is a function from entities of that type to objects. Since ‘the direction of’ is intended to stand for a function from objects of a certain sort to other objects, the Direction Equivalence is a first-order, or in Fine’s terminology objectual, abstraction; since ‘the number of’ is intended to stand for a function from concepts to objects, Hume’s principle is a higher-order, or as Fine says conceptual, abstraction. As is well-known, Frege himself abandoned the idea of defining number implicitly or contextually by means of Hume’s principle—adopting instead an explicit definition of the number of Fs as the extension of the concept concept equinumerous to the concept F— because he thought that an adequate definition should settle the question whether Julius Caesar, for example, is or is not the number of some concept, but that the proposed implicit definition cannot do so. But interest in abstraction principles has revived in the last couple of decades, largely as a result of Crispin Wright’s attempt to show that in spite of the many difficulties confronting it—including the notorious Julius Caesar problem— Hume’s principle can after all serve as a foundation for arithmetic.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The limits of abstraction. [REVIEW]Øystein Linnebo - 2004 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 82 (4):653-656.
The limits of abstraction.Kit Fine - 2002 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Matthias Schirn.
The Nature and Limits of Abstraction. [REVIEW]Stewart Shapiro - 2004 - Philosophical Quarterly 54 (214):166 - 174.
The Limits of Abstraction.Kit Fine - 2005 - Philosophical Studies 122 (3):367-395.
The Nature and Limits of Abstraction.Stewart Shapiro - 2004 - Philosophical Quarterly 54 (214):166-174.
The Limits of Abstraction.Kit Fine - 2004 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 10 (4):554-557.
Kit fine on the limits of abstraction.Bob Hale - 2006 - Travaux de Logique 18.
Abstraction Relations Need Not Be Reflexive.Jonathan Payne - 2013 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 2 (2):137-147.
Review: The limits of abstraction by Kit fine. [REVIEW]John P. Burgess - 2003 - Notre Dame Journal Fo Formal Logic 44:227-251.
Book Review: Kit Fine. The Limits of Abstraction. [REVIEW]John P. Burgess - 2003 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 44 (4):227-251.
Abstraction and Four Kinds of Invariance.Roy T. Cook - 2017 - Philosophia Mathematica 25 (1):3–25.
The Culture of Abstraction.Alberto Toscano - 2008 - Theory, Culture and Society 25 (4):57-75.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
96 (#173,807)

6 months
15 (#145,565)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Frege, Kant, and the logic in logicism.John MacFarlane - 2002 - Philosophical Review 111 (1):25-65.
Reals by Abstraction.Bob Hale - 2000 - Philosophia Mathematica 8 (2):100--123.
New V, ZF and Abstraction.Stewart Shapiro & Alan Weir - 1999 - Philosophia Mathematica 7 (3):293-321.
On Specifying Truth-Conditions.Agustín Rayo - 2008 - Philosophical Review 117 (3):385-443.
What is neologicism?Bernard Linsky & Edward N. Zalta - 2006 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 12 (1):60-99.

View all 20 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references