Talk:Concept and object

Philosophy: Logic / Language Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic
	Philosophy of language

Linguistics: Philosophy of language

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Philosophy of language task force.

?

I was wondering about the addition of context, the phil. of language, to this article. I wanted to post something here instead of just change it. I'm not sure why either the distinction itself or the difficulties Frege faced with the distinction should be situated in philosophy of language. The distinction itself was, arguably, part of Frege's metaphysics (although it is true that those that have Wittgensteinian readings of Frege might disagree). The difficulty or awkwardness he faced as a result of trying to articulate this distinction in natural language ( the "concept horse" problem) is a problem that is best situated in philosophical logic. Cvalenzu 22:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised this is not listed in the references:

Geach, P. (1976), 'Saying And Showing In Frege And Wittgenstein', Acta Filosophica Fennica 28, pp.54-70.

And Hartley Slater's essay is now available in print in his The De-Mathematisation Of Logic (Polimetrica, 2007).

Rosa Lichtenstein (talk) 15:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

90% of this article is either false of misleading. How about putting a flag on it, hoping that someone will revise it?