dor_id: 4115488

506.#.#.a: Público

590.#.#.d: Cada artículo es evaluado mediante una revisión ciega única. Los revisores son externos nacionales e internacionales.

510.0.#.a: Arts and Humanities Citation Index, Revistes Cientifiques de Ciencies Socials Humanitais (CARHUS Plus), Latinoamericanas en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades (CLASE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH PLUS), Sistema Regional de Información en Línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal (Latindex), SCOPUS, Journal Storage (JSTOR), The Philosopher’s Index, Ulrich’s Periodical Directory

561.#.#.u: http://www.filosoficas.unam.mx/

650.#.4.x: Artes y Humanidades

336.#.#.b: article

336.#.#.3: Artículo de Investigación

336.#.#.a: Artículo

351.#.#.6: http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica

351.#.#.b: Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía

351.#.#.a: Artículos

harvesting_group: RevistasUNAM

270.1.#.p: Revistas UNAM. Dirección General de Publicaciones y Fomento Editorial, UNAM en revistas@unam.mx

590.#.#.c: Open Journal Systems (OJS)

270.#.#.d: MX

270.1.#.d: México

590.#.#.b: Concentrador

883.#.#.u: http://www.revistas.unam.mx/front/

883.#.#.a: Revistas UNAM

590.#.#.a: Coordinación de Difusión Cultural, UNAM

883.#.#.1: https://www.publicaciones.unam.mx/

883.#.#.q: Dirección General de Publicaciones y Fomento Editorial, UNAM

850.#.#.a: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

856.4.0.u: http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica/article/view/376/365

100.1.#.a: Gómez, Ricardo J.

524.#.#.a: Gómez, Ricardo J. (1981). On a Revision of Logicism. Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía; Vol 13 No 38, 1981; 77-95. Recuperado de https://repositorio.unam.mx/contenidos/4115488

245.1.0.a: On a Revision of Logicism

502.#.#.c: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

561.1.#.a: Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, UNAM

264.#.0.c: 1981

264.#.1.c: 2018-11-23

506.1.#.a: La titularidad de los derechos patrimoniales de esta obra pertenece a las instituciones editoras. Su uso se rige por una licencia Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 Internacional, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.es, fecha de asignación de la licencia 2018-11-23, para un uso diferente consultar al responsable jurídico del repositorio por medio del correo electrónico alberto@filosoficas.unam.mx

884.#.#.k: http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica/article/view/376

001.#.#.#: critica:oai:ojs2.132.248.184.97:article/376

041.#.7.h: spa

520.3.#.a: In Mathematical Knowledge, Mark Steiner discusses several schools in the philosophy of mathematics; in the first two chapters he attempts to criticize what he believes is a correct reconstruction of several epistemic aspects of logicism and what he assumes are serious difficulties of Quine’s philosophy of mathematics. Our main claim is that his critical revision of logicism in incorrect On the one hand, he gave an equivocal characterization of its central problems and theses; as a result, he actuality has criticized claims which were never supported by the logicist philosophers. On the other hand, he wrongly evaluated Quine’s reduction of Arithmetic into Theory of Sets. In fact, his criticism is based in an inadequate conception of some features of Quine’s philosophy of mathematics. Thus, Steiner wrongly understood Quine’s view about the reduction of theories by assuming that such a reduction should satisfy such requirements as clarity, certainty and an improvement in operativity. Finally, he blamed Quine’s reduction for raising problems that, truly, do not emerge. As a consequence, logicism seems to stay beyond Steiner’s criticism.[R.J.G.] Resumen

773.1.#.t: Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía; Vol 13 No 38 (1981); 77-95

773.1.#.o: http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica

046.#.#.j: 2021-09-28 00:00:00.000000

022.#.#.a: ISSN electrónico: 1870-4905; ISSN impreso: 0011-1503

310.#.#.a: Cuatrimestral

300.#.#.a: Páginas: 77-95

264.#.1.b: Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, UNAM

758.#.#.1: http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica

doi: https://doi.org/10.22201/iifs.18704905e.1981.376

handle: 00ca2175fe01724c

856.#.0.q: application/pdf

file_creation_date: 2010-10-12 20:09:47.0

file_modification_date: 2010-10-29 21:09:29.0

file_creator: IIFs

file_name: 764708a56965e6569cbc5ef1e4a1b9665420591fbaf2d4a482311d3f2401fe72.pdf

file_pages_number: 19

file_format_version: application/pdf; version=1.6

file_size: 270586

245.1.0.b: En torno a una revisión del logicismo

last_modified: 2021-11-09 23:50:00

license_url: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.es

license_type: by-nc-nd

No entro en nada

No entro en nada 2

Artículo

On a Revision of Logicism

Gómez, Ricardo J.

Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, UNAM, publicado en Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía, y cosechado de Revistas UNAM

Licencia de uso

Procedencia del contenido

Cita

Gómez, Ricardo J. (1981). On a Revision of Logicism. Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía; Vol 13 No 38, 1981; 77-95. Recuperado de https://repositorio.unam.mx/contenidos/4115488

Descripción del recurso

Autor(es)
Gómez, Ricardo J.
Tipo
Artículo de Investigación
Área del conocimiento
Artes y Humanidades
Título
On a Revision of Logicism
Fecha
2018-11-23
Resumen
In Mathematical Knowledge, Mark Steiner discusses several schools in the philosophy of mathematics; in the first two chapters he attempts to criticize what he believes is a correct reconstruction of several epistemic aspects of logicism and what he assumes are serious difficulties of Quine’s philosophy of mathematics. Our main claim is that his critical revision of logicism in incorrect On the one hand, he gave an equivocal characterization of its central problems and theses; as a result, he actuality has criticized claims which were never supported by the logicist philosophers. On the other hand, he wrongly evaluated Quine’s reduction of Arithmetic into Theory of Sets. In fact, his criticism is based in an inadequate conception of some features of Quine’s philosophy of mathematics. Thus, Steiner wrongly understood Quine’s view about the reduction of theories by assuming that such a reduction should satisfy such requirements as clarity, certainty and an improvement in operativity. Finally, he blamed Quine’s reduction for raising problems that, truly, do not emerge. As a consequence, logicism seems to stay beyond Steiner’s criticism.[R.J.G.] Resumen
Idioma
spa
ISSN
ISSN electrónico: 1870-4905; ISSN impreso: 0011-1503

Enlaces