In Hannes Leitgeb & Alexander Hieke (eds.), Reduction – Abstraction – Analysis. Ontos. pp. 11--305 (2009)
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).
|Keywords||Philosophy of Mathematics|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Ernst Cassirer's Neo-Kantian Philosophy of Geometry.Jeremy Heis - 2011 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 19 (4):759 - 794.
Which Abstraction Principles Are Acceptable? Some Limitative Results.Øystein Linnebo & Gabriel Uzquiano - 2009 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (2):239-252.
Marcus Herz: First Letter (1770) / Herz ; Second Letter (1771) / Kant ; Third Letter (1771) / Herz ; Observations From Speculative Philosophy (1771) / Herz ; Fourth Letter (1772) ; Fifth Letter (1776). Kant - 2009 - In Eric Watkins (ed.), Kant's Critique of Pure Reason: Background Source Materials. Cambridge University Press.
What is the Purpose of Neo-Logicism?Marcus Rossberg & Philip A. Ebert - 2007 - Traveaux de Logique 18:33-61.
Added to index2010-01-14
Total downloads97 ( #51,838 of 2,158,004 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #359,001 of 2,158,004 )
How can I increase my downloads?