Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton March 18, 2021

Four puzzling paragraphs: Frege on ‘≡’ and ‘=’

María de Ponte ORCID logo, Kepa Korta and John Perry
From the journal Semiotica

Abstract

In §8 of his Begriffsschrift (1879), Gottlob Frege discusses issues related to identity. Frege begins his most famous essay, “On Sense and Denotation” (1892), published 13 years later, by criticizing the view advocated in §8. He returns to these issues in the concluding paragraph. Controversies continue over these important passages. We offer an interpretation and discuss some alternatives. We defend that in the Begriffsschrift, Frege does not hold that identity is a relation between signs. §8 of the Begriffsschrift is motivated by the conflict between two different criteria for sameness of conceptual content of sentences. To resolve that conflict, Frege introduces ‘≡’ in §8 and, thus, circumstances with names as constituents. To the same end, in “On Sense and Denotation,” Frege introduces senses and Thoughts and abandons both ‘≡’ and circumstances. He solves what we call the Co-instantiation problem, and disregards, but does not solve, the Name problem.


Corresponding author: María de Ponte, ILCLI and Philosophy Department, University of the Basque Country, Donostia, Spain, E-mail:

Funding source: Spanish Government

Award Identifier / Grant number: FFI2015-63719-P (MINECO/FEDER, UE); PID2019-106078GB-I00 (MCI/AEI/FEDER, UE)

Funding source: Basque Government

Award Identifier / Grant number: IT1032-16

Acknowledgement

This paper was inspired by our dissatisfaction with the discussion of these problems in an early draft of Perry’s Frege’s Detour (2019), and inspired the discussion in later drafts. We are grateful to the members of the Zoom group, and the audience of the World Philosophy Congress at Beijing (August 2918), where we presented an early version of it. The first two authors benefitted from grants by the Spanish Government (FFI2015-63719-P (MINECO/FEDER, UE); PID2019-106078GB-I00 (MCI/AEI/FEDER, UE)) and the Basque Government (IT1032-16). We are very thankful for the comments of an anonymous reviewer. We are particularly very grateful to Tadeusz Ciecierski for his invitation and his help and patience during the process.

References

Angelelli, Ignacio. 1967. Studies on Gottlob Frege and traditional philosophy. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.10.1007/978-94-017-3175-1Search in Google Scholar

Bar-Elli, Gilead. 2006. Identity in Frege’s Begriffsschrift: Where both Thau-Caplan and Heck are wrong. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 36(3). 355–370. https://doi.org/10.1353/cjp.2006.0014.Search in Google Scholar

Beaney, Michael. 1996. Frege: Making sense. London: Duckworth.Search in Google Scholar

Beaney, Michael (ed.). 1997. The Frege reader. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Corazza, Eros & Kepa Korta. 2015. Frege on subject matter and identity statements. Analysis 75(4). 562–565.10.1093/analys/anv073Search in Google Scholar

Dickie, Imogen. 2008. Informative identities in the Begriffsschrift and “on sense and denotation”. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 38(2). 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1353/cjp.0.0015.Search in Google Scholar

Dummett, Michael A. E. 1981a. Frege: Philosophy of language, 2nd edn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Dummett, Michael A. E. 1981b. The interpretation of Frege’s philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Frege, Gottlob. 1948 [1892]. Sense and reference, Max Black (trans.). The Philosophical Review 57. 207–230. https://doi.org/10.2307/2181485.Search in Google Scholar

Frege, Gottlob. 1967 [1879]. Begriffsschrift: A formula language, modeled upon that of arithmetic, for pure thought, Stefan Bauer-Mengelberg (trans.). In Jean van Heijenoort (ed.), From Frege to Gödel: A source book in mathematical logic, 1879–1931. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Peter Geach & Max Black (eds.). 1960. Translations from the philosophical writings of Gottlob Frege, 2nd edn. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Goldfarb, Warren. 2010. Frege’s conception of logic. In Tom Ricketts (ed.), Cambridge companion to Frege, 63–86. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CCOL9780521624282.003Search in Google Scholar

Heck, Richard. 2003. Frege on identity and identity-statements: A reply to Thau and Caplan. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 33(1). 83–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/00455091.2003.10716536.Search in Google Scholar

Kremer, Michael. 2010. Sense and reference: The origins and development of the distinction. In Tom Ricketts (ed.), Cambridge companion to Frege, 220–293. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CCOL9780521624282.007Search in Google Scholar

May, Robert. 2001. Frege on identity statements. In Carlo Cecchetto, Gennaro Chierchia & Maria Teresa Guasti (eds.), Semantic interfaces: Reference, anaphora, and aspect, 1–62. Stanford: CSLI.Search in Google Scholar

May, Robert. 2012. What Frege’s theory of identity is not. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 1(1). 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1002/tht3.6.Search in Google Scholar

Mendelsohn, Richard L. 1982. Frege’s Begriffsschrift theory of identity. Journal of the History of Philosophy 20(3). 279–299. https://doi.org/10.1353/hph.1982.0029.Search in Google Scholar

Perry, John. 2012. Reference and reflexivity, 2nd edn. Stanford: CSLI.Search in Google Scholar

Perry, John. 2019. Frege’s detour. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198812821.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Salmon, Nathan. 1986. Frege’s puzzle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Sluga, Hans. 1980. Gottlob Frege. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Search in Google Scholar

Thau, Michael & Ben Caplan. 2001. What is puzzling Gottlob Frege? Canadian Journal of Philosophy 31(2). 159–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/00455091.2001.10717564.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2021-01-22
Accepted: 2021-01-31
Published Online: 2021-03-18
Published in Print: 2021-05-26

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston