Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Am I understanding Frege correctly?

ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2015 3:43:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I ran this by my Philosophy professor for an hour or so, but he wasn't that familiar with Frege, so I want more opinions.

This is based off of Frege's "The Thought: A Logical Inquiry".

- Existents in themselves have no truth value. Correspondence theorists argue that truth value is determined by relations between things.

- For a relation to be true implies that the two related things be equivalent in nature.

- Saying that something like "It is true that the sky is blue" does not imply a correspondence between "sky" and "blue", but rather between the *proposition itself* and things in reality.

- Since propositions/sentences cannot be equivalent to existents, the Correspondence Theory is unable to provide an explanation of truth.

- A distinction is then drawn between existents and things that truth can apply to. Sentences with meaning are the only things that can be true or false, and the meaning is the part that makes it so - this meaning is known as the "thought" of a sentence.

- Thoughts are further distinguished from "ideas", which have the following qualities: They must be had (implying reliance on a subject) and they must be unique to the bearer (implying that ideas cannot "span minds" and are instead wholly personal).

- Since certain statements such as "2 + 2 = 4" have the same content and are true regardless of the subject, they fail the uniqueness test, and therefore are not ideas.

- If an idea must have a bearer, a world made of solely ideas is incoherent - in such a world, the bearer itself would be an idea, and would have no bearer of itself. There must be *some* bearer which is not an idea, defeating idealism.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz
missingone
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2015 3:45:56 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/2/2015 3:43:02 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
I ran this by my Philosophy professor for an hour or so, but he wasn't that familiar with Frege, so I want more opinions.

This is based off of Frege's "The Thought: A Logical Inquiry".

- Existents in themselves have no truth value. Correspondence theorists argue that truth value is determined by relations between things.

- For a relation to be true implies that the two related things be equivalent in nature.

- Saying that something like "It is true that the sky is blue" does not imply a correspondence between "sky" and "blue", but rather between the *proposition itself* and things in reality.

- Since propositions/sentences cannot be equivalent to existents, the Correspondence Theory is unable to provide an explanation of truth.

- A distinction is then drawn between existents and things that truth can apply to. Sentences with meaning are the only things that can be true or false, and the meaning is the part that makes it so - this meaning is known as the "thought" of a sentence.

- Thoughts are further distinguished from "ideas", which have the following qualities: They must be had (implying reliance on a subject) and they must be unique to the bearer (implying that ideas cannot "span minds" and are instead wholly personal).

- Since certain statements such as "2 + 2 = 4" have the same content and are true regardless of the subject, they fail the uniqueness test, and therefore are not ideas.

- If an idea must have a bearer, a world made of solely ideas is incoherent - in such a world, the bearer itself would be an idea, and would have no bearer of itself. There must be *some* bearer which is not an idea, defeating idealism. : :

It helps to know the truth first. Then he will teach you everything he knows.
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2015 2:33:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/2/2015 3:43:02 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
I ran this by my Philosophy professor for an hour or so, but he wasn't that familiar with Frege, so I want more opinions.

This is based off of Frege's "The Thought: A Logical Inquiry".

- Existents in themselves have no truth value. Correspondence theorists argue that truth value is determined by relations between things.

- For a relation to be true implies that the two related things be equivalent in nature.
I haven't read Frege, but I am interested in his justification for this.
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2015 5:36:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/4/2015 2:33:10 PM, Fkkize wrote:
At 10/2/2015 3:43:02 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
I ran this by my Philosophy professor for an hour or so, but he wasn't that familiar with Frege, so I want more opinions.

This is based off of Frege's "The Thought: A Logical Inquiry".

- Existents in themselves have no truth value. Correspondence theorists argue that truth value is determined by relations between things.

- For a relation to be true implies that the two related things be equivalent in nature.
I haven't read Frege, but I am interested in his justification for this.

This seems like a good (short) overview of the paper: http://www.partiallyexaminedlife.com...

I'm not sure how to explain it any differently than how they do, so I'll just leave you with that. I'm certainly not an expert.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz