Hale、Heck和Wright对新逻辑学和高阶逻辑的评价

IF 0.8 1区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Philosophia Mathematica Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1093/philmat/nkab017
Crispin Wright
{"title":"Hale、Heck和Wright对新逻辑学和高阶逻辑的评价","authors":"Crispin Wright","doi":"10.1093/philmat/nkab017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Four philosophical concerns about higher-order logic in general and the specific demands placed on it by the neo-logicist project are distinguished. The paper critically reviews recent responses to these concerns by, respectively, the late Bob Hale, Richard Kimberly Heck, and myself. It is argued that these score some successes. The main aim of the paper, however, is to argue that the most serious objection to the applications of higher-order logic required by the neo-logicist project has not been properly understood. The paper concludes by outlining a strategy, prefigured in recent work of Øystein Linnebo, for meeting this objection.","PeriodicalId":49004,"journal":{"name":"Philosophia Mathematica","volume":"29 3","pages":"392-416"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Taking Stock: Hale, Heck, and Wright on Neo-Logicism and Higher-Order Logic\",\"authors\":\"Crispin Wright\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/philmat/nkab017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Four philosophical concerns about higher-order logic in general and the specific demands placed on it by the neo-logicist project are distinguished. The paper critically reviews recent responses to these concerns by, respectively, the late Bob Hale, Richard Kimberly Heck, and myself. It is argued that these score some successes. The main aim of the paper, however, is to argue that the most serious objection to the applications of higher-order logic required by the neo-logicist project has not been properly understood. The paper concludes by outlining a strategy, prefigured in recent work of Øystein Linnebo, for meeting this objection.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49004,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophia Mathematica\",\"volume\":\"29 3\",\"pages\":\"392-416\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophia Mathematica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9623713/\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophia Mathematica","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9623713/","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

区分了对高阶逻辑的四种哲学关注,以及新逻辑学家项目对其提出的具体要求。本文批判性地回顾了已故的鲍勃·黑尔、理查德·金伯利·赫克和我本人最近对这些问题的回应。有人认为,这些措施取得了一些成功。然而,本文的主要目的是认为,对新逻辑学家项目所要求的高阶逻辑应用的最严重的反对意见还没有得到正确的理解。论文最后概述了一项战略,该战略在最近的工作中已经预见到,以满足这一反对意见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Taking Stock: Hale, Heck, and Wright on Neo-Logicism and Higher-Order Logic
Four philosophical concerns about higher-order logic in general and the specific demands placed on it by the neo-logicist project are distinguished. The paper critically reviews recent responses to these concerns by, respectively, the late Bob Hale, Richard Kimberly Heck, and myself. It is argued that these score some successes. The main aim of the paper, however, is to argue that the most serious objection to the applications of higher-order logic required by the neo-logicist project has not been properly understood. The paper concludes by outlining a strategy, prefigured in recent work of Øystein Linnebo, for meeting this objection.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Philosophia Mathematica
Philosophia Mathematica HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
26
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Philosophia Mathematica is the only journal in the world devoted specifically to philosophy of mathematics. The journal publishes peer-reviewed new work in philosophy of mathematics, the application of mathematics, and computing. In addition to main articles, sometimes grouped on a single theme, there are shorter discussion notes, letters, and book reviews. The journal is published online-only, with three issues published per year.
期刊最新文献
The Logic of Potential Infinity Predicative Classes and Strict Potentialism Is Iteration an Object of Intuition? A Taxonomy for Set-Theoretic Potentialism Up with Categories, Down with Sets; Out with Categories, In with Sets!
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1