Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstraction

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Ciccarelli, Vincenzo
Data de Publicação: 2022
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Principia (Florianópolis. Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/77217
Resumo: A famous passage in Section 64 of Frege’s Grundlagen may be seen as a justification for the truth of abstraction principles. The justification is grounded in the procedure of content recarving which Frege describes in the passage. In this paper I argue that Frege’s procedure of content recarving while possibly correct in the case of first-order equivalence relations is insufficient to grant the truth of second-order abstractions. Moreover, I propose a possible way of justifying second-order abstractions by referring to the operation of content recarving and I show that the proposal relies to a certain extent on the Basic Law V. Therefore, if we are to justify the truth of second-order abstractions by invoking the content recarving procedure we are committed to a special status of some instances of the Basic Law V and thus to a special status of extensions of concepts as abstract objects.
id UFSC-5_9c0d3883990e66a0fcd50a54ca5ce3d3
oai_identifier_str oai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/77217
network_acronym_str UFSC-5
network_name_str Principia (Florianópolis. Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstractionAbstraction principlesBasic Law Vcontent recarvinghigher-order logicA famous passage in Section 64 of Frege’s Grundlagen may be seen as a justification for the truth of abstraction principles. The justification is grounded in the procedure of content recarving which Frege describes in the passage. In this paper I argue that Frege’s procedure of content recarving while possibly correct in the case of first-order equivalence relations is insufficient to grant the truth of second-order abstractions. Moreover, I propose a possible way of justifying second-order abstractions by referring to the operation of content recarving and I show that the proposal relies to a certain extent on the Basic Law V. Therefore, if we are to justify the truth of second-order abstractions by invoking the content recarving procedure we are committed to a special status of some instances of the Basic Law V and thus to a special status of extensions of concepts as abstract objects.Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC2022-08-19info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/7721710.5007/1808-1711.2022.e77217Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 26 No. 2 (2022); 183-204Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 26 Núm. 2 (2022); 183-204Principia: an international journal of epistemology; v. 26 n. 2 (2022); 183-2041808-17111414-4247reponame:Principia (Florianópolis. Online)instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)instacron:UFSCenghttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/77217/51418Copyright (c) 2021 Vincenzo Ciccarellihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCiccarelli, Vincenzo2022-08-19T16:53:29Zoai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/77217Revistahttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principiaPUBhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/oaiprincipia@contato.ufsc.br||principia@contato.ufsc.br1808-17111414-4247opendoar:2022-08-19T16:53:29Principia (Florianópolis. Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstraction
title Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstraction
spellingShingle Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstraction
Ciccarelli, Vincenzo
Abstraction principles
Basic Law V
content recarving
higher-order logic
title_short Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstraction
title_full Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstraction
title_fullStr Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstraction
title_full_unstemmed Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstraction
title_sort Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstraction
author Ciccarelli, Vincenzo
author_facet Ciccarelli, Vincenzo
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Ciccarelli, Vincenzo
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Abstraction principles
Basic Law V
content recarving
higher-order logic
topic Abstraction principles
Basic Law V
content recarving
higher-order logic
description A famous passage in Section 64 of Frege’s Grundlagen may be seen as a justification for the truth of abstraction principles. The justification is grounded in the procedure of content recarving which Frege describes in the passage. In this paper I argue that Frege’s procedure of content recarving while possibly correct in the case of first-order equivalence relations is insufficient to grant the truth of second-order abstractions. Moreover, I propose a possible way of justifying second-order abstractions by referring to the operation of content recarving and I show that the proposal relies to a certain extent on the Basic Law V. Therefore, if we are to justify the truth of second-order abstractions by invoking the content recarving procedure we are committed to a special status of some instances of the Basic Law V and thus to a special status of extensions of concepts as abstract objects.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-08-19
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/77217
10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e77217
url https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/77217
identifier_str_mv 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e77217
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/77217/51418
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Vincenzo Ciccarelli
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Vincenzo Ciccarelli
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 26 No. 2 (2022); 183-204
Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 26 Núm. 2 (2022); 183-204
Principia: an international journal of epistemology; v. 26 n. 2 (2022); 183-204
1808-1711
1414-4247
reponame:Principia (Florianópolis. Online)
instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)
instacron:UFSC
instname_str Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)
instacron_str UFSC
institution UFSC
reponame_str Principia (Florianópolis. Online)
collection Principia (Florianópolis. Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Principia (Florianópolis. Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv principia@contato.ufsc.br||principia@contato.ufsc.br
_version_ 1789435108860624896