Abstract
Abstract I begin by commenting on Kant’s conception of analytic judgements. I then turn to Frege’s notion of analyticity. I argue that his definition of analytic truth in terms of provability from logical axioms and definitions is incomplete. The requisite analyticity of the logical axioms and the definitions, and accordingly the required justification of acknowledging them as true, must be explained in a non-deductive way. I further argue that analyticity in terms of deductive proof deviates significantly from Kant’s conception of analytic judgements. I conclude with two case studies. The first concerns Frege’s attempted justification of the synthetic nature of the geometrical axioms. The second deals with Hume’s Principle, which in his logicist project Frege must establish as an analytic truth.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
