Talk:Function and Concept
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hi. I thought that I wouldn't alter this page until I posted something here. There are some inaccuracies on this page.
First, I think this page would benefit from giving the distinctions between different levels of concepts, the distinction between concepts and functions (concepts are a proper subset), and a better explanation of course of values/extension of a concept.
Second, the connection between this work and "On Sense and Reference" and "On Concept and Object" is misguided. Frege's notion of function/concept does not correspond to the difference between intension (I think this is what was intended) and extensions. The intension of a functional expression is the sense of a function and the extension (bedeutung) of a functional expression is the referent of the concept expression. Still that disitnction is not the topic of this article (it's in his unpublished "Comments on Concept and Object").
This brings me to the last point. I'm not sure what the comparison box is doing given that Frege's paper doesn't deal with the distinction between intension/extension or sense/reference.
Cvalenzu 22:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- It sounds as though you know a lot about this - BE BOLD - change it! References would be nice too, though. Anarchia 05:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- Stub-Class Philosophy articles
- Low-importance Philosophy articles
- Stub-Class philosophical literature articles
- Low-importance philosophical literature articles
- Philosophical literature task force articles
- Stub-Class logic articles
- Low-importance logic articles
- Logic task force articles
- Stub-Class philosophy of language articles
- Low-importance philosophy of language articles
- Philosophy of language task force articles
- Stub-Class Linguistics articles
- Unknown-importance Linguistics articles
- WikiProject Linguistics articles