{"title":"Stipulations Missing Axioms in Frege's Grundgesetze der Arithmetik","authors":"Gregory Landini","doi":"10.1080/01445340.2022.2062664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Frege's Grundgesetze der Arithmetik offers a conception of cpLogic as the study of functions. Among functions are included those that are concepts, i.e. characteristic functions whose values are the logical objects that are the True/the False. What, in Frege's view, are the objects the True/the False? Frege's stroke functions are themselves concepts. His stipulation introducing his negation stroke mentions that it yields But curiously no accommodating axiom is given, and there is no such theorem. Why is it that some of Frege's informal stipulations never made appearances as axioms? I offer an explanation that sheds new light on the Grundgesetze. No axioms should over-determination the True as a logical object. Perhaps the True = 0, as would be common in the mathematics of characteristic functions. But the logical objects that are cardinal numbers are value ranges correlated with second-level numerical concepts by a non-homogeneous second-level value-range function . The existence of concepts would be ontologically circular if the True is itself a number. We find this circularity perfectly agreeable to Frege, and suggest that he had accepted that the existence of functions that are concepts in his cpLogic may well be ontologically inseparable from the existence of his value-range function. His cpLogic itself stands or falls with the viability of some value-range function.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01445340.2022.2062664","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Frege's Grundgesetze der Arithmetik offers a conception of cpLogic as the study of functions. Among functions are included those that are concepts, i.e. characteristic functions whose values are the logical objects that are the True/the False. What, in Frege's view, are the objects the True/the False? Frege's stroke functions are themselves concepts. His stipulation introducing his negation stroke mentions that it yields But curiously no accommodating axiom is given, and there is no such theorem. Why is it that some of Frege's informal stipulations never made appearances as axioms? I offer an explanation that sheds new light on the Grundgesetze. No axioms should over-determination the True as a logical object. Perhaps the True = 0, as would be common in the mathematics of characteristic functions. But the logical objects that are cardinal numbers are value ranges correlated with second-level numerical concepts by a non-homogeneous second-level value-range function . The existence of concepts would be ontologically circular if the True is itself a number. We find this circularity perfectly agreeable to Frege, and suggest that he had accepted that the existence of functions that are concepts in his cpLogic may well be ontologically inseparable from the existence of his value-range function. His cpLogic itself stands or falls with the viability of some value-range function.
Frege的Grundgesetze der Arithmetik提出了cpllogic作为函数研究的概念。函数中包括那些概念函数,即特征函数,其值是逻辑对象的真/假。在弗雷格看来,什么是对象的真/假?弗雷格的笔画函数本身就是概念。他在引入否定笔触的规定中提到,它产生了但奇怪的是,没有给出与之相适应的公理,也没有这样的定理。为什么弗雷格的一些非正式规定从未作为公理出现?我提供了一种解释,为《纲领》提供了新的视角。任何公理都不应过分规定作为逻辑对象的真。也许True = 0,这在特征函数的数学中是很常见的。但是,作为基数的逻辑对象是通过非齐次的第二级值范围函数与第二级数值概念相关联的值范围。如果真本身是一个数,那么概念的存在在本体论上就是循环的。我们发现这种循环完全符合弗雷格的观点,并认为他已经接受了在他的cpllogic中作为概念的函数的存在性很可能在本体论上与他的值域函数的存在性是不可分割的。他的cpLogic本身与一些值范围函数的生存能力有关。