Philosophical Papers 12 (2):32-38 (1983)

If the begriffsschrift from Frege does represent the logical form of natural language it either lacks a logical form itself, or its logical form is different to that of natural language. But Frege insists that his notation has a logical form. So the second disjunct holds. This suggests that Frege's notation will generate consequences different to those that can be derived with natural language, with its different logical form. For anyone looking for "a means of avoiding misunderstandings", as Frege does, this would be unpalatable, to say the least.
Keywords natural language  begriffsschrift  representation  logical form
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/05568648309506217
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Conceptual Notation and Related Articles. [REVIEW]John Corcoran & David Levin - 1972 - Philosophy of Science 36 (1):148-149.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Linguistics and Natural Logic.George Lakoff - 1970 - Synthese 22 (1-2):151 - 271.
Knowledge and Experience.Calvin Dwight Rollins (ed.) - 1962 - [Pittsburgh, Pa.]University of Pittsburgh Press.
Natural Rights and Political Legitimacy.Christopher W. Morris - 2005 - Social Philosophy and Policy 22 (1):314-329.
Understanding Natural Language.John Haugeland - 1979 - Journal of Philosophy 76 (November):619-32.


Added to PP index

Total views
100 ( #118,233 of 2,517,896 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #137,869 of 2,517,896 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes