Abstract
The question motivating the present work is: what is really the significance of Frege with respect to the philosophical tradition? Of course this question may also be viewed as a particular case of the more general one: what is the significance of modern “Grundlagenforschung” or modern logic with respect to the philosophical tradition? The problem is of the type quid sit rather than of the type an sit, the latter enjoying nowadays an unanimously affirmative answer. Our aim is therefore to provide more precise answers to the question regarding the nature of Frege’s relations with the philosophical tradition. Such relations may be considered under different aspects. In one of these aspects Frege’s significance with respect to the philosophical past has already been largely dealt with; this is his purely formal logical creation. And perhaps the above mentioned unanimity is mostly restricted to Frege qua logician.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bochenski [1], p. 317.
Cf. note 12.
Cf. Section 10.6.
UFT (1885) contains a particularly clear and concise formulation of logicism, but GRL (1884) already includes the same ideas.
For the pure intuition cf. BG, § 23 (“… selbst durch eine Anschauung a priori…).” Also GRL, §§ 90, 91.
BG, Vorwort,p. IV (“… Damit sich hierbei nicht unbemerkt etwas Anschauliches eindrangen könnte…”). But see the more impressive statement in GRL, § 91: “Um diese Übelstände zu vermindern [i.e., to detect non-logical factors in demonstration], habe ich meine Begriffsschrift erdacht.”
I expand in this way Frege’s statement in BG, p. IV below. Cf. note 5 here.
This is of course a free interpretation of the word “Begriffsschrift”,but I think it is adequate to Frege’s insights.
wir gelangten zu einer Verbesserung der Ansicht Kants“ (GRL, § 109). This is the result (1884) of the program sketched in 1879 (BG, Vorwort). Frege thinks that ”außer von Kant noch wenig in dieser Richtung geleistet worden ist“ (COH, p. 324). For Leibniz cf. BG, Vorwort.
Cf. Section 10.6.
Of course Frege was not supposed to know history of philosophy.
Marty [1], p. 56. Mortan [1] contains (Anhang) the best biographical references on Frege, including a publication of the Gutachten of Frege’s academic life.
Cf. BG (reprint Olms), Vorbemerkung. Frege’s lack of success among mathematicians is notorious, cf., for instance, GRG, I, p. XI, note; also Linke [1].
Cf. Chapter 1, note 5.
Husserl’s Philosophie der Arithmetik was written in close relation to Frege’s GRL, as Frege’s Nachlaß,particularly, shows. There were misunderstandings between both thinkers, of course. See for instance Section 3.6, and even deeper differences may be indicated; cf. Section 2.26.
Heidegger [4]: “G. Freges logisch-mathematische Forschungen sind meines Erachtens in ihrer wahren Bedeutung noch nicht gewürdigt, geschweige dann ausgeschöpft.” This was written in 1912. Heidegger rightly points out the significance of Frege’s notion of Begri f ft: (Reference provided by A. Battro.)
Frege, Kleine Schriften (cf. bibliography).
As far as I know, only Bartlett [1] and Sluga [1] provide extensive quotations from the Nachlaß; also Bochenski [1], 39.01.
Kneale [1], p. 298; Bochenski [1], p. 297.
For instance Wundt [1].
Cf. Wilpert [1], p. 89.
Above all Risse [1]. Examples of active research in the field are also: Schilling [1], Greniewski [1] (for Poland), Pereira Gomez [1] (for Portugal), Munoz Delgado [1] (for Spain), etc.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1967 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Angelelli, I. (1967). Introduction. In: Studies on Gottlob Frege and Traditional Philosophy. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3175-1_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3175-1_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-8326-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-3175-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive