TY - JOUR
T1 - Logic, judgment, and inference
T2 - What frege should have said about illogical thought
AU - Mezzadri, Daniele
N1 - Funding Information:
80Earlier versions of this paper were given as talks at the University of York, the University of Stirling, Istanbul University, and Roma Tre University. I wish to express my gratitude to those audiences, especially to Michael Beaney, Mario De Caro, Maria Rosaria Egidi, Simon Evnine, Kent Hurtig, Peter Milne, Matteo Morganti, Peter Sullivan, Joshua Thorpe, and Robert Trueman. For comments and critical feedback on earlier drafts, I am grateful to Graham Priest and particularly to Joan Weiner. Work on this paper has benefited from a UAEU-CHSS Start-Up Research Grant (Grant No. 3099/31H083). I gratefully acknowledge this support. Finally, I would like to dedicate this work to Eva Picardi, who first taught me Frege and who gave me valuable feedback on earlier versions of this paper. Her death is a great loss for the whole philosophical community. She is sorely missed.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Johns Hopkins University Press.
PY - 2018/10
Y1 - 2018/10
N2 - This paper addresses Frege's discussion of illogical thought in the introduction to Basic Laws of Arithmetic. After a brief introduction, I discuss Frege's claims that logic is normative vis-à-vis thought, and not descriptive, and his opposition to the idea that logical laws express psychological necessities. I argue that these two strands of Frege's polemic against psychologism constitute two motivating factors behind his allowing for the possibility of illogical thought. I then explore a line of thought - originally advanced by Joan Weiner - according to which Frege should have rejected illogical thought as not constituting a genuine possibility. I argue that, once developed, this line of thought constitutes an important correction (moreover, one that is consistent with his two aforementioned anti-psychologistic strands) to Frege's own response to the possibility of illogical thought.
AB - This paper addresses Frege's discussion of illogical thought in the introduction to Basic Laws of Arithmetic. After a brief introduction, I discuss Frege's claims that logic is normative vis-à-vis thought, and not descriptive, and his opposition to the idea that logical laws express psychological necessities. I argue that these two strands of Frege's polemic against psychologism constitute two motivating factors behind his allowing for the possibility of illogical thought. I then explore a line of thought - originally advanced by Joan Weiner - according to which Frege should have rejected illogical thought as not constituting a genuine possibility. I argue that, once developed, this line of thought constitutes an important correction (moreover, one that is consistent with his two aforementioned anti-psychologistic strands) to Frege's own response to the possibility of illogical thought.
KW - Frege
KW - Illogical thought
KW - Inference
KW - Judgment
KW - Logic
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057209644&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85057209644&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1353/hph.2018.0074
DO - 10.1353/hph.2018.0074
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85057209644
SN - 0022-5053
VL - 56
SP - 727
EP - 746
JO - Journal of the History of Philosophy
JF - Journal of the History of Philosophy
IS - 4
ER -