Saturday 29 May 2010

Carnap and Grice in the history of logic (KEYWORD: "History of Logic")

-- by J. L. Speranza, of the Grice Club
---- for the Carnap Corner

I SHOULD DROP A NOTE IN "THE CITY of eternal truth", someday -- but the point is there. I am fascinated that Jones found that chapter on "Carnap and modern logic" (by Reck), in the Friede et al, Cambridge companion to Carnap -- of interest.

We should discuss a bit of a timeline here. As we move towards the overlapping of things.

From what _I_ see, "Whitehead/Russell" are central. This was 1910, but the whole thing was finished by 1913, only. Then there's the 1914 notebooks by Wittgenstein, which ARE important from a historical perspective.

Then of course we have anything EARLIER. Grice was OBSESSED by Russell, "On denoting" (Mind, 1905 -- which thus predates his collaboration with Whitehead) and I would think Carnap thought of Russell's theory of description of some value.

Then we can go EARLIER, to my pet: nineteenth-century logic. Frege, of course. But which WERE the general tracts by Frege: the conceptual notation, of course, which as Jones notes elsewhere (his website) is just Leibniz (and I'd add Wilkins) deja vue all over again!

---- Frege's PHILOSOPHICAL points were perhaps more 'minor'. Then there's PEANO, which Ruseell adopted, at least at the point of terminology --.

At an earlier time, the divergences between, say, British and Continental sources diverge. And I wouldn't know which German authors which are relevant to the History of GERMAN logic are of GENERAL importance. Stigwart perhaps. Then we should go back to KANT. Because after all, he wrote on Logic, too. People are too obsessed with his general theory of knowledge, but most of his points were purely logic, and it's very good to see that neo-Kantian is used, with a straight face, when talking Carnap.

Before that, we go to the scholastics which were pretty confused on a number of things, but not on ALL things. Kneale, "The Development of Logic" has been useful to me on this. And then, yes, we get to Aristotle! -- And categoricity without tears!

No comments:

Post a Comment