web site hit counter Philosophy of Logic - Ebooks PDF Online
Hot Best Seller

Philosophy of Logic

Availability: Ready to download

First published in 1971, Professor Putnam's essay concerns itself with the ontological problem in the philosophy of logic and mathematics - that is, the issue of whether the abstract entities spoken of in logic and mathematics really exist. He also deals with the question of whether or not reference to these abstract entities is really indispensible in logic and whether it First published in 1971, Professor Putnam's essay concerns itself with the ontological problem in the philosophy of logic and mathematics - that is, the issue of whether the abstract entities spoken of in logic and mathematics really exist. He also deals with the question of whether or not reference to these abstract entities is really indispensible in logic and whether it is necessary in physical science in general.


Compare

First published in 1971, Professor Putnam's essay concerns itself with the ontological problem in the philosophy of logic and mathematics - that is, the issue of whether the abstract entities spoken of in logic and mathematics really exist. He also deals with the question of whether or not reference to these abstract entities is really indispensible in logic and whether it First published in 1971, Professor Putnam's essay concerns itself with the ontological problem in the philosophy of logic and mathematics - that is, the issue of whether the abstract entities spoken of in logic and mathematics really exist. He also deals with the question of whether or not reference to these abstract entities is really indispensible in logic and whether it is necessary in physical science in general.

41 review for Philosophy of Logic

  1. 5 out of 5

    David Scarratt

    If this is the book I think it is -- and I think it is -- then I think it's essentially an extended argument against nominalism, of the Nelson Goodman kind. But I read it a long time ago when I was even more of a novice in philosophy than I am now, so I may be misremembering a poor understanding. If this is the book I think it is -- and I think it is -- then I think it's essentially an extended argument against nominalism, of the Nelson Goodman kind. But I read it a long time ago when I was even more of a novice in philosophy than I am now, so I may be misremembering a poor understanding.

  2. 4 out of 5

    Aron van der Beek

  3. 5 out of 5

    MoonishT

  4. 5 out of 5

    Stephen Yablo

  5. 4 out of 5

    Josiah Lopez-Wild

  6. 5 out of 5

    Nick Wilson

  7. 5 out of 5

    Maja Krych

  8. 5 out of 5

    Paul Oppenheimer

  9. 5 out of 5

    Sebastian Barrymore

  10. 4 out of 5

    Gavin

  11. 5 out of 5

    Federico Ponzoni

  12. 5 out of 5

    Gerardo Suarez

  13. 4 out of 5

    Ian Van

  14. 4 out of 5

    Christian Giliberto

  15. 5 out of 5

    Alexandre Guay

  16. 5 out of 5

    Mostfa

  17. 5 out of 5

    Pranciskusgri

  18. 4 out of 5

    Joshua Jarrott

  19. 4 out of 5

    Ahmed

  20. 5 out of 5

    Cyberdionysos

  21. 5 out of 5

    Espen

  22. 5 out of 5

    Mary Kay

  23. 5 out of 5

    Pilcrow

  24. 4 out of 5

    Leo Horovitz

  25. 4 out of 5

    Creative

  26. 4 out of 5

    Ryan Coons

  27. 4 out of 5

    Johnny

  28. 4 out of 5

    Eliška

  29. 5 out of 5

    Christopher

  30. 4 out of 5

    Kat Steiner

  31. 5 out of 5

    Joe

  32. 4 out of 5

    David Sjolander

  33. 4 out of 5

    Chris

  34. 5 out of 5

    Shindy

  35. 4 out of 5

    J.

  36. 5 out of 5

    Secret Name

  37. 5 out of 5

    Stm2010

  38. 5 out of 5

    Skeptical Leftist

  39. 5 out of 5

    Rebecca

  40. 5 out of 5

    Peter Stanbridge

  41. 4 out of 5

    Yan Kai

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.