Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
prospectmagazine.co.uk
Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
1–10 of 26 posts
Re: Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
#2How completely obnoxious article. Frege was a tragic figure in philosophy, his work was recognized only through Russel and he is still very much ignored by the tradition he created. He answered the Russel paradox in the same way modern theory does, by introducing types, but instead of learning from him, especially the epistemological parts that are a relevant connection of analytical philosophy to kantianism, he was ignored and is for some reason ridiculed by the anglosphere tradition that know him only through Russel (the most overrated philosopher in history).
Re: Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
#3Clive James led off an essay by suggesting that there was a buddy movie to be made around Wittgenstein and Russell. He was joking, but part of the joke is that their fame much outran any engagement with or even interest in their philosophical work. I don't think that leaving little memory beyond the work is a bad thing. What does it add to one's understanding of Kant to know a few anecdotes about the regularity of his life.
One can regret the opinions in Frege's diaries without it affecting what one thinks about the work.
Re: Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
#4How completely obnoxious article. Frege was a tragic figure in philosophy, his work was recognized only through Russel and he is still very much ignored by the tradition he created. He answered the Russel paradox in the same way modern theory does, by introducing types, but instead of learning from him, especially the epistemological parts that are a relevant connection of analytical philosophy to kantianism, he was…
I'm inclined to agree that Russell was overrated. His most influential work was a mistake.
> he is still very much ignored by the tradition he created
Really? When I studied philosophy[0], reading at least some Frege was required for Philosophy of Logic and Philosophy of Language. Frege wasn't treated as obscure or unimportant; quite the reverse. Have things changed?
[0] University of London, early 80's. Philosophical tastes vary rather widely from one institution to another.
Re: Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
#5How completely obnoxious article. Frege was a tragic figure in philosophy, his work was recognized only through Russel and he is still very much ignored by the tradition he created. He answered the Russel paradox in the same way modern theory does, by introducing types, but instead of learning from him, especially the epistemological parts that are a relevant connection of analytical philosophy to kantianism, he was…
I'm inclined to agree that Russell was overrated. His most influential work was a mistake. > he is still very much ignored by the tradition he created Really? When I studied philosophy[0], reading at least some Frege was required for Philosophy of Logic and Philosophy of Language. Frege wasn't treated as obscure or unimportant; quite the reverse. Have things changed? [0] University of London, early 80's. Philosophica…
I studied philosophy 10 years ago and we did several weeks on Sense and Reference in one of the modules. He also was discussed in other classes in relation to Kripke and other more modern philosophers.
Re: Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
#6Clive James led off an essay by suggesting that there was a buddy movie to be made around Wittgenstein and Russell. He was joking, but part of the joke is that their fame much outran any engagement with or even interest in their philosophical work. I don't think that leaving little memory beyond the work is a bad thing. What does it add to one's understanding of Kant to know a few anecdotes about the regularity of hi…
No post body was provided.
Re: Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm inclined to agree that Russell was overrated. His most influential work was a mistake. > he is still very much ignored by the tradition he created Really? When I studied philosophy[0], reading at least some Frege was required for Philosophy of Logic and Philosophy of Language. Frege wasn't treated as obscure or unimportant; quite the reverse. Have things changed? [0] University of London, early 80's. Philosophica…
I studied philosophy 10 years ago and we did several weeks on Sense and Reference in one of the modules. He also was discussed in other classes in relation to Kripke and other more modern philosophers.
Yeah, he is discussed in seminars as a kind of proto analytical philosopher.
Re: Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
I studied philosophy 10 years ago and we did several weeks on Sense and Reference in one of the modules. He also was discussed in other classes in relation to Kripke and other more modern philosophers.
Yeah, he is discussed in seminars as a kind of proto analytical philosopher.
We studied him too, he kicks off most of the major anthologies. Seems he's almost universally considered an overlooked founder of analytic philosophy. (There's the famous story about how Wittgenstein showed up on his doorstep to move in and study and Frege said, "no just go to Russell," he even underrated himself.)
So he is partly famous for not being famous, a paradox he would hopefully appreciate.
Re: Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
#9How completely obnoxious article. Frege was a tragic figure in philosophy, his work was recognized only through Russel and he is still very much ignored by the tradition he created. He answered the Russel paradox in the same way modern theory does, by introducing types, but instead of learning from him, especially the epistemological parts that are a relevant connection of analytical philosophy to kantianism, he was…
I'm inclined to agree that Russell was overrated. His most influential work was a mistake. > he is still very much ignored by the tradition he created Really? When I studied philosophy[0], reading at least some Frege was required for Philosophy of Logic and Philosophy of Language. Frege wasn't treated as obscure or unimportant; quite the reverse. Have things changed? [0] University of London, early 80's. Philosophica…
I meant analytic philosophy, that hardly ever includes Frege.
Re: Gottlob Frege: The machine in the ghost (2017)
#10How completely obnoxious article. Frege was a tragic figure in philosophy, his work was recognized only through Russel and he is still very much ignored by the tradition he created. He answered the Russel paradox in the same way modern theory does, by introducing types, but instead of learning from him, especially the epistemological parts that are a relevant connection of analytical philosophy to kantianism, he was…
As others have said, I do think Frege gets a fair shake in academia, but he definitely could be studied more. He certainly doesn’t have the near pop-philosophical status of a Russel. I would also agree that Russel is overrated. For some reason, the public seems to love experts of narrow technical or scientific fields that proffer, usually inadequate, takes of other areas like morals all whilst ignoring the experts in fields like morality (I can think of some other situations in which the political opinions of e.g. cosmologists are venerated on the basis of their expertise in cosmology, which of course makes absolutely no sense but seems to be something people love to do. Apparently deeply specialized expertise means you’re “smart” and therefore anything you say even on subjects you don’t know a lick about must also be “smart”)
Aside from Wittgenstein, Frege is the “analytic” philosopher I most admire. There’s a certain creative genius that shines through his work that I feel is absent from the work of many other analytic philosophers. His short Foundations of Mathematics text quite literally changed my life by making math interesting to me for the first time. I was lucky enough to read a copy of the Begriffs chrift since my school’s library had it, it’s a work of beauty!