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.

42 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. 5 out of 5

    Aron van der Beek

  3. 5 out of 5

    MoonishT

  4. 5 out of 5

    Stephen Yablo

  5. 5 out of 5

    Josiah Lopez-Wild

  6. 5 out of 5

    Nick Wilson

  7. 4 out of 5

    Maja Krych

  8. 4 out of 5

    Paul Oppenheimer

  9. 5 out of 5

    Sebastian Barrymore

  10. 5 out of 5

    Gavin

  11. 5 out of 5

    M R

  12. 5 out of 5

    Federico Ponzoni

  13. 5 out of 5

    Gerardo Suarez

  14. 5 out of 5

    Ian Van

  15. 4 out of 5

    Christian Giliberto

  16. 4 out of 5

    Alexandre Guay

  17. 5 out of 5

    Mostfa

  18. 5 out of 5

    Pranciskusgri

  19. 5 out of 5

    Joshua Jarrott

  20. 4 out of 5

    Ahmed

  21. 5 out of 5

    Cyberdionysos

  22. 4 out of 5

    Espen

  23. 5 out of 5

    Mary Kay

  24. 4 out of 5

    Pilcrow

  25. 4 out of 5

    Leo Horovitz

  26. 4 out of 5

    Creative

  27. 5 out of 5

    Ryan Coons

  28. 5 out of 5

    Johnny

  29. 5 out of 5

    Eliška

  30. 4 out of 5

    Christopher

  31. 5 out of 5

    Kat Steiner

  32. 4 out of 5

    Joe

  33. 4 out of 5

    David Sjolander

  34. 5 out of 5

    Chris

  35. 5 out of 5

    Shindy

  36. 5 out of 5

    J.

  37. 5 out of 5

    Secret Name

  38. 5 out of 5

    Stm2010

  39. 5 out of 5

    Skeptical Leftist

  40. 4 out of 5

    Rebecca

  41. 5 out of 5

    Peter Stanbridge

  42. 5 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.