Volume 2, Issue 4 (2022)
jpt 2022, 2(4): 339-354 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Maleki A. Criticism of Frege's View on the Replacement of Thought Instead of the Definitions of Truth; a Case Study in Correspondence Theory of Truth. jpt 2022; 2 (4) :339-354
URL: http://jpt.modares.ac.ir/article-34-64753-en.html
URL: http://jpt.modares.ac.ir/article-34-64753-en.html
Philosophy Department, Mofid University, Qom, Iran
Abstract: (1110 Views)
Thought in Frege’s point of view is accompanied by innovations as well as ambiguities that have been examined from various points of view. But Frege's view of conventional definitions of truth and rejecting them is the main topic of this article. In his explanation of propositions containing thought and judgment, Frege doesn’t accept the conventional definitions of truth for their sequence, and in order to solve the problem of achieving the truth and value of propositions, he proposes "Thought" and tries to replace it. In order to clarify this claim, we first examine language and thought from his point of view, and then by entering into the subject of thought and discovering its characteristics, we will try to understand Frege's claim to replace it with the definitions of truth. Finally, with the plan of seven critiques, the author believes that this replacement is not possible and fruitful.
Keywords: Gottlob Frege, Philosophy of language, Rejection on definitions of truth, replacement of thought, Correspondence theory
Article Type: Original Research |
Subject:
Philosophy of Language (Analytical)
Received: 2022/10/11 | Accepted: 2023/02/4 | Published: 2023/03/1
Received: 2022/10/11 | Accepted: 2023/02/4 | Published: 2023/03/1
References
1. Burge T (2005). Truth, thought, reason: Essays on frege. New York: Oxford University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199278534.001.0001]
2. Carl W (1995). Frege's Theory of sense and reference, its origins and scope. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139172356]
3. Caton CE (1962). An apparent difficulty in frege's ontology. The Philosophical Review. 71(4):462-475. [Link] [DOI:10.2307/2183458]
4. Dummett M (1973). Frege: Philosophy of language. New York: Harper and Row Publishers. [Link]
5. Dummett M (1981). Frege: Philosophy of Language. 2nd Ed. London: Duckworth. [Link]
6. Frege G (1948). Sense and reference. The Philosophical Review. 57(3):209-230. [Link] [DOI:10.2307/2181485]
7. Frege G (1956). The thought: A logical inquiry. Mind. 65(59):289-311. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/mind/65.1.289]
8. Frege G (1972). Conceptual notation. TW Bynum Translator. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Link]
9. Frege G (1979). Posthumous writing. P Long Translator. Chicago: Chicago University Press. [Link]
10. Frege G (1981). Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege. PP Geach, M Black editor. London: Basil Blackwell. [Link]
11. Frege G (1989). Philosophical and mathematical correspondence. Oxford: Blackwell. [Link]
12. Mendelsohn RL (2005). The philosophy of gottlob frege. New York: Cambridge University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511497964]
13. Newen A, Ulrich N, Rainer SL (2001). Building on Frege new essays about sense, content and concepts. Stanford: CSLI Publications. [Link]
14. Noonan HW (2001). Frege: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Polity. [Link]
15. Rein A (1985). Frege and natural language. Philosophy. 60(234):513-524. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/S0031819100042546]
16. Sullivan A (2003). Logicism and the philosophy of language: Selection from Frege and Russell. Mississauga: Broadview Press. [Link]
17. Textor M (2011). Routledge philosophy guidebook to Frege on sense and reference. New York: Routledge. [Link] [DOI:10.4324/9780203845905]
18. Weiner J (2005). Frege explained: From arithmetic to analytic philosophy. Chicago: Open Court. [Link]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |