Book contents
Bibliography
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 April 2020
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Kant's Philosophy of Mathematics , pp. 296 - 311Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Adams, Robert (1994): Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Albers, Donald J., Alexanderson, Gerald L. and Reid, Constance (eds.) (1990): More Mathematical People: Contemporary Conversations. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Allison, Henry E. (1968): Kant’s Transcendental Idealism. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Allison, Henry E. (1973): The Kant–Eberhard Controversy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Altmann, Alexander (1969): Moses Mendelssohns Frühschriften zur Metaphysik. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
Andersen, Svend (1983): Ideal und Singularität: Über die Funktion des Gottesbegriffes in Kants theoretischer Philosophie. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Anderson, Lanier (2001): “Synthesis, Cognitive Normativity, and the Meaning of Kant’s Question ‘How Are Synthetic Cognitions A Priori Possible?’,” European Journal of Philosophy 9, 275–305.Google Scholar
Anderson, Lanier (2004): “It Adds Up After All: Kant’s Philosophy of Arithmetic in Light of the Traditional Logic,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 69, 501–540.Google Scholar
Anderson, Lanier (2005): “The Wolffian Paradigm and Its Discontents: Kant’s Containment Definition of Analyticity in Historical Context,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 87, 22–74.Google Scholar
Anderson, Lanier (2015): The Poverty of Conceptual Truth: Kant’s Analytic/Synthetic Distinction and the Limits of Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Arnauld, Antoine and Nicole, Pierre (1996): Logic or the Art of Thinking. Translated and edited by Buroker, Jill Vance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ashworth, E. J. (1974): Language and Logic in the Post-medieval Period. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Bacin, Stefano, Ferrarin, Alfredo, La Rocca, Claudio, and Ruffing, Margit (eds.) (2013): Kant und die Philosophie in weltbürgerlicher Absicht. Akten des XI. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses Pisa 2010 (2 vols.). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Baumgarten, Alexander Gottlieb (1757) [Metaphysica]: Metaphysica (4th ed.). Halle: Hemmerde. Reprinted in AA15 and AA17.Google Scholar
Baumgarten, Alexander Gottlieb (1761) [Logica]: Acroasis logica. Halle: Hemmerde. Reprinted in Wolff (GW, 3:5).Google Scholar
Baumgarten, Alexander Gottlieb (2009) [Aesthetica]: Ästhetik (2 vols.). Translated and edited by Mirbach, Dagmar. Hamburg: Felix Meiner. Originally published as Aesthetica (1750, 1758).Google Scholar
Beck, Lewis White (1955/1956): “Can Synthetic Be Made Analytic?” in Gram, (ed.) (1967), 228–246.Google Scholar
Beiser, Frederick C. (1987): The Fate of Reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Beiser, Frederick C. (2009): German Idealism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bernays, Paul (1930–1931): “Die Philosophie der Mathematik und die Hilbertsche Beweistheorie,” Blätter für deutsche Philosophie 4, 326–367. Reprinted in Bernays (1976). Translated in Mancosu (1998), 234–265.Google Scholar
Bernays, Paul (1976): Abhandlungen zur Philosophie der Mathematik. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Beth, Evert W. (1953/1954): “Kants Einteilung der Urteile in analytische und synthetische,” Algemeen Nederlandsch Tijdschrift voor Wijsbegeerte en Psychologie 46, 253–264.Google Scholar
Beth, Evert W. (1956/1957): “Über Lockes ‘allgemeines Dreieck’,” Kant-Studien 48, 361–380.Google Scholar
Beth, Evert W. (1965): Mathematical Thought: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Mathematics. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brittan, Gordon (1978): Kant’s Theory of Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Brittan, Gordon (1986): “Kant’s Two Grand Hypotheses,” in Butts, Robert. E. (ed.): Kant’s Philosophy of Physical Science. Dordrecht: Reidel, 61–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brittan, Gordon (1989): “Constructibility and the World-Picture,” in Funke, Gerhard and Seebohm, Thomas. M. (eds.): Proceedings of the Sixth International Kant Congress. Washington, DC: University Press of America, 65–82.Google Scholar
Brittan, Gordon (1995): “The Continuity of Matter: Notes on Friedman,” in Robinson, (ed.) (1995), 611–618.Google Scholar
Brittan, Gordon (2006): “Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics,” in Bird, Graham (ed.): A Companion to Kant. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 222–235.Google Scholar
Broad, C. D. (1978): Kant, An Introduction. Edited by Lewy, C. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brouwer, L. E. J. (1913): “Intuitionism and Formalism,” Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 20, 81–96. Reprinted in Brouwer (1975), 123–138.Google Scholar
Brouwer, L. E. J. (1952): “Historical Background, Principles and Methods of Intuitionism,” South African Journal of Science 49, 139–146. Reprinted in Brouwer (1975), 508–515.Google Scholar
Brouwer, L. E. J. (1975): Collected Works, Volume 1: Philosophy and Foundations of Mathematics. Edited by Heyting, A. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Brouwer, L. E. J. (2000): “Intuitionism and Formalism,” Bull. American Mathematical Society 37:1, 55–64. Translated by Dresden, Arnold. Originally published as “Intuïtionisme en formalisme,” Wiskundig tijdschrift, 9 (1913).Google Scholar
Callanan, John (2014): “Mendelssohn and Kant on Mathematics and Evidence,” Kant Yearbook 6, 1–21.Google Scholar
Cantor, Georg (1883): Grundlagen einer allgeneinen Mannigfaltigkeitslehre, ein mathematisch-philosophischer Versuch in der Lehre des Unendlichen. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Cantor, Georg (1895/1897): “Beiträge zur Begründung der transfiniten Mengenlehre,” Mathematische Annalen 46: 481–512, 49: 207–246. Translated as (1915): Contributions to the Founding of the Theory of Transfinite Numbers by Jourdain, Philip E. B. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Capozzi, Mirella (1973): “J. Hintikka e il metodo della matematica in Kant,” Il Pensiero 18, 232–67.Google Scholar
Capozzi, Mirella (1982): “Sillogismi e proposizioni singolari: Due aspetti della critica di Wolff a Leibniz,” in Buzzetti, Dino and Ferriani, Maurizio (eds.): La grammatica del pensiero: Logica, linguaggio e conoscenza nell’età dell’Illuminismo. Bologna: il Mulino, 103–150.Google Scholar
Capozzi, Mirella (1987): “Kant on Logic, Language and Thought,” in Buzzetti, Dino and Ferriani, Maurizio (eds.): Speculative Grammar, Universal Grammar, and Philosophical Analysis of Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 97–147.Google Scholar
Capozzi, Mirella (2002): Kant e la logica, Vol. 1. Napoli: Bibliopolis. Reprint (2013).Google Scholar
Capozzi, Mirella (2009): “La teoria kantiana dei concetti e il problema dei nomi propri,” Dianoia 14, 119–146.Google Scholar
Capozzi, Mirella (2011): “Philosophy and Writing: The Philosophical Book according to Kant,” Quaestio 11, 307–350.Google Scholar
Capozzi, Mirella (2013): “The Quantity of Judgments and the Categories of Quantity: A Problem in the Metaphysical Deduction,” in Bacin, , Ferrarin, , La Rocca, , and Ruffing, (eds.) (2013), 2:65–75.Google Scholar
Capozzi, Mirella and Roncaglia, Gino (2009): “Logic and Philosophy of Logic from Humanism to Kant,” in Haaparanta, Leila (ed.): The Development of Modern Logic. New York: Oxford University Press, 78–158.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf (1966): Philosophical Foundations of Physics. Edited by Gardner, Martin. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Carson, Emily (1997): “Kant on Intuition in Geometry,” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 27, 489–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, Emily (1999): “Kant on the Method of Mathematics,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 37, 629–652.Google Scholar
Carson, Emily (2004): “Metaphysics, Mathematics, and the Distinction between the Sensible and Intelligible in Kant’s Inaugural Dissertation,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 42, 165–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, Emily and Huber, Renate (eds.) (2006): Intuition and the Axiomatic Method. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Cohen, Hermann (1871): Kant’s Theorie der Erfahrung. Berlin: Dümmler. 2nd ed. (1885) Berlin: Dümmler; 3rd ed. (1918) Berlin: Bruno Cassirer.Google Scholar
Couturat, Louis (1901): La logique de Leibniz. Paris: Alcan. Reprinted in 1961, Hildesheim: Georg Olms.Google Scholar
Couturat, Louis (1905): Les principes des mathématiques, avec un appendice sur la philosophie des mathématiques de Kant. Paris: Alcan.Google Scholar
Crossley, John N. and Dummett, Michael A. E. (eds.) (1965): Formal Systems and Recursive Functions: Proceedings of the Eighth Logic Colloquium, Oxford, July 1963. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Crusius, Christian A. (1745) [Entwurf]: Entwurf der notwendigen Vernunftwahrheiten. Reprinted in Werke, Vol. 2.Google Scholar
Crusius, Christian A. (1747) [Weg]: Weg zur Gewißheit u. Zuverlässigkeit der menschlichen Erkenntnis. Reprinted in Werke, Vol. 3.Google Scholar
Crusius, Christian A. (1964) [Werke]: Die philosophischen Hauptwerke (4 vols.). Edited by Tonelli, Giorgio. Hildesheim: Georg Olms.Google Scholar
Dedekind, Richard (1872): Stetigkeit und irrationale Zahlen. Braunschweig: Vieweg. Reprinted in Dedekind (1932). Translated in Dedekind (1963).Google Scholar
Dedekind, Richard (1888): Was sind und was sollen die Zahlen. Braunschweig: Vieweg (originally published as a separate booklet). Reprinted in Dedekind (1932). Translated in Dedekind (1963).Google Scholar
Dedekind, Richard (1932): Gesammelte Werke, Vol. 3. Edited by Fricke, R., Noether, E., and Ore, O. Braunschweig: Vieweg.Google Scholar
Dedekind, Richard (1963): Essays on the Theory of Numbers. Translated by Beman, W. W. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
De Risi, Vincenzo (2015): Leibniz on the Parallel Postulate and the Foundations of Geometry. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
Descartes, René (1954): Geometry. Translated by Smith, D. E. and Latham, M. L. New York: Dover Books.Google Scholar
Descartes, René (1996) [AT]: Oeuvres de Descartes (12 vols.). Edited by Adam, Charles and Tannery, Paul. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
Detlefsen, Michael (2005): “Formalism,” in Shapiro, Stewart (ed.): The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 236–317.Google Scholar
Domski, Mary and Dickson, Michael (eds.) (2010): Discourse on a New Method: Reinvigorating the Marriage of History and Philosophy of Science. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
Dunlop, Katherine (2009): “Why Euclid’s Geometry Brooked No Doubt: J. H. Lambert on Certainty and the Existence of Models,” Synthese 167, 33–65.Google Scholar
Dunlop, Katherine (2012): “Kant and Strawson on the Content of Geometrical Concepts,” Noûs 46, 86–126.Google Scholar
Dunlop, Katherine (2014): “Arbitrary Combination and the Use of Signs in Mathematics: Kant's 1763 Prize Essay and Its Wolffian background,” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 44, 658–685.Google Scholar
Edwards, Charles H. (1979): The Historical Development of the Calculus. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Einarson, Benedict (1936): “On Certain Mathematical Terms in Aristotle’s Logic,” American Journal of Philology 57, 33–44 and 151–172.Google Scholar
Engfer, H.-J. (1983): “Zur Bedeutung Wolffs für die Methoden-diskussion der deutschen Aufklärungsphilosophie: Analytische und synthetische Methode bei Wolff und beim vorkritischen Kant,” in Schneiders, Werner (ed.): Christian Wolff 1679–1754: Interpretationen zu seiner Philosophie und deren Wirkung. Hamburg: Felix Meiner, 48–65.Google Scholar
Euler, Leonhard (1984): Elements of Algebra (5th ed.). Translated by Hewlett, John. New York: Springer-Verlag. Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra (1770). Petersburg: Royal Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Ewald, William (1996): From Kant to Hilbert: A Source Book in the Foundations of Mathematics (2 vols.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Fichant, Michel (1997): “‘L’Espace est représenté comme une grandeur infinie donnée’: La radicalité de l’Esthétique,” Philosophie 56, 20–48.Google Scholar
Fine, Kit (1985): Reasoning with Arbitrary Objects, Aristotelian Society Monograph Series, Vol. 3. Oxford: Basil BIackwell.Google Scholar
Flatt, C. C. (1802): Fragmentarische Bemerkungen gegen den Kantischen und Kiesewetterischen Grundriss der reinen allgemeinen Logik: Ein Beytrag zur Vervollkommnung dieser Wissenschaft. Tübingen: Heerbrandt. Reprinted in 1968, Bruxelles: Culture et Civilization.Google Scholar
Förster, Eckart (2000): Kant’s Final Synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Frege, Gottlob (1879) [Bg]: Begriffsschrift: Eine der arithmetischen nachgebildete Formelsprache des reinen Denkens. Halle: Louis Nebert. Translated by Bauer-Mengelberg, Stefan (1967) as: Begriffsschrift: A Formula Language, Modeled upon that of Arithmetic, for Pure Thought, in van Heijenoort, Jean (ed.) (1967): From Frege to Gödel: A Sourcebook in Mathematical Logic, 1879–1931. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Frege, Gottlob (1884) [GL]: Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik: Eine logisch mathematische Untersuchung über den Begriff der Zahl. Berlin: Georg Olms. Translated by Austin, J. L. (1961) as: The Foundations of Arithmetic: A Logico-Mathematical Enquiry into the Concept of Number. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Frege, Gottlob (1892): “Über Sinn und Bedeutung,” Zeitschrift für Philosophie Und Philosophische Kritik 100, 25–50. Translated by Black M. (1952) as: “On Sense and Reference,” in Geach, Peter and Black, Max (eds.): Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege. Oxford: Blackwell, 56–78.Google Scholar
Frege, Gottlob (1918): “Der Gedanke: Eine logische Untersuchung,” Beiträge zur Philosophie des deutchen Idealiismus 1, 58–77.Google Scholar
Frege, Gottlob (1979): “Logic in Mathematics.” Translated by Lond, P. and White, R. in Hermes, H., Kambartel, F., and Kaulbach, F. (eds.): Posthumous Writings. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael (1985): “Kant’s Theory of Geometry,” Philosophical Review 94, 455–506. Reprinted in Friedman (1992), 55–95, and in Posy (ed.) (1992), 177–219.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael (1990): “Kant on Concepts and Intuitions in the Mathematical Sciences,” Synthese 84, 213–257. Reprinted in Friedman (1992), 96–135.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael (1992): Kant and the Exact Sciences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael (1995): “Matter and Material Substance in Kant’s Philosophy of Nature,” in Robinson, (ed.) (1995), 595–610.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael (2000): “Geometry, Construction and Intuition in Kant and his Successors,” in Sher, and Tieszen, (eds.) (2000), 186–218.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael (2010): “Synthetic History Reconsidered,” in Domski, and Dickson, (eds.) (2010), 571–814.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael (2012a): “Kant on Geometry and Spatial Intuition,” Synthese 186, 231–255.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael (2012b): “Newton and Kant: Quantity of Matter in the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science,” Southern Journal of Philosophy 50, 482–503.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael (2012c): “The Prolegomena and Natural Science,” in Lyre, Holger and Schliemann, Oliver (eds.): Kants Prolegomena. Ein kooperativer Kommentar. Frankfurt: Klostermann, 299–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Michael (2013): Kant’s Construction of Nature: A Reading of the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Michael (2015): “Kant on Geometry and Experience,” in De Risi, V. (ed.): Mathematizing Space: The Objects of Geometry from Antiquity to the Early Modern Age. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
Garber, Daniel (2009): Leibniz: Body, Substance, Monad. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Garber, Daniel and Longuenesse, Béatrice (eds.) (2008): Kant and the Early Moderns. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gödel, Kurt (1990): Collected Works, Volume 2: Publications 1938–1974. Edited by Feferman, Solomon, Dawson, John W., Kleene, Stephen C., Moore, Gregory H., Solovay, Robert M., Heijenoort, Jean van. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gödel, Kurt (1995): Collected Works, Volume 3: Unpublished Essays and Lectures. Edited by Feferman, Solomon, Dawson, John W., Goldfarb, Warren, Parsons, Charles, Solovay, Robert M. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Green, Ronald (1992): Kierkegaard and Kant: The Hidden Debt. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Guyer, Paul (1987): Kant and the Claims of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Guyer, Paul (1991): “Mendelssohn and Kant,” Philosophical Topics 19, 119–152. Cited as reprinted in Guyer (2000): Kant on Freedom, Law, and Happiness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 17–59.Google Scholar
Guyer, Paul (ed.) (1992): Cambridge Companion to Kant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallett, Michael (2006): “Gödel, Realism and Mathematical Intuition,” in Carson, and Huber, (eds.) (2006), 113–132.Google Scholar
Hanna, Robert (2001): Kant and the Foundations of Analytic Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hartz, Glenn and Cover, J. A. (1988): “Space and Time in the Leibnizian Metaphysic,” Noûs 22, 493–519.Google Scholar
Sir Heath, Thomas L. (1926): The Thirteen Books of Euclid’s Elements, translated from the text of Heiberg, with introduction and commentary (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. (1802): “Glauben und Wissen, oder die Relfexionsphilosophie der Subjektivität in der Vollständigkeit ihrer Formen als Kantische, Jacobische und Fichtesche Philosophie,” Kritisches Journal der Philosophie 2, 1–188. Reprinted in 1962, Hamburg: Meiner. Translated and edited by Cerf, W. and Harris, H. S. (1977) as: Faith and Knowledge. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Also in Werke, Vol. 2.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin (1927): Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. Translated by Macquarrie, John and Robinson, Edward (1962) as: Being and Time. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin (1929): Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik. Bonn: Friedrich Cohen, Translated by Taft, R. (1997) as: Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin (1962): Die Frage nach dem Ding. Zu Kants Lehre von den transzendentalen Grundsätzen. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. Translated by Barton, W. B. Jr. and Deutsch, V. (1967) as: What is a Thing. Chicago: Henry Regnery.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin (1977): Phänomenologische Interpretation von Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Frankfurt: Klostermann. Translated by Emad, Parvis and Maly, Kenneth as: Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Heis, Jeremy (2014): “Kant (vs. Leibniz, Wolff and Lambert) on Real Definitions in Geometry,” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 44, 605–630.Google Scholar
Henrich, Dieter (1955): “Über die Einheit der Subjektivität,” Philosophische Rundschau 3, 28–69.Google Scholar
Henrich, Dieter (1968–1969): “The Proof-Structure of Kant’s Transcendental Deduction,” Review of Metaphysics 22, 640–659.Google Scholar
Hilbert, David and Cohen-Vossen, Stefan (1952): Geometry and Imagination. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (1959): “Kantin oppi matematiikasta: tutkimuksia sen peruskäsitteistä, rakenteesta ja esikuvista,” Ajatus 22, 5–58.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (1965a): “Kant and the Tradition of Analysis” in Crossley, and Dummett, (eds.) (1965), 48–91. Reprinted in Hintikka (1973), 199–221.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (1965b): “Kant’s ‘New Method of Thought’ and His Theory of Mathematics,” Ajatus 27, 37–47. Reprinted in Hintikka (1974), 126–134.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (1967): “Kant on the Mathematical Method,” The Monist 51, 352–375. Reprinted in Posy (ed.) (1992), 21–42.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (1969a): “On Kant’s Notion of Intuition (Anschauung),” in Penelhum, Terence and Macintosh, J. J. (eds.): The First Critique. Reflections on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Belmont, CA: Waldsworth, 38–53.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (1969b): “Kant on the Mathematical Method,” in Beck, Lewis White (ed.) Kant Studies Today. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 117–140.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (1973): Logic, Language-Games and Information: Kantian Themes in the Philosophy of Logic. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (1982): “Kant’s Theory of Mathematics Revisited,” Philosophical Topics 12, 201–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (1984): “Kant’s Transcendental Method and His Theory of Mathematics,” Topoi 3, 99–108. Reprinted in Posy (ed.) (1992), 341–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (1998): Language, Truth and Logic in Mathematics. Selected Papers, Vol. 3. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko (2012): “Method of Analysis: A Paradigm of Mathematical Reasoning?” History and Philosophy of Logic 33, 49–67.Google Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko and Hintikka, Merril B. (1989): The Logic of Epistemology and the Epistemology of Logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas (1656): Six Lessons to the Professors of the Mathematics, One of Geometry, the Other of Astronomy. London: J. M. for Andrew Crook. Reprinted in (1845): The English Works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, Vol. 7. Edited by Molesworth, Sir William, London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 181–356.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, A. F. (1729): Gedanken über Hn. Christian Wolffens Logic oder sogenannte Philosophiam rationalem. Leipzig: J. S. Hensio.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, A. F. (1737): Vernunft-Lehre, darinnen die Kennzeichen des Wahren und Falschen aus den Gesetzen des menschlichen Verstandes hergeleitet werden. Hildesheim: Georg Olms. Reprinted in Wolff (GW, 3:99).Google Scholar
Hogan, Desmond (2013): “Metaphysical Motives of Kant’s Analytic–Synthetic Distinction,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 51, 267–308.Google Scholar
Howell, Robert (1973): “Intuition, Synthesis, and Individuation in the Critique of Pure Reason,” Noûs 7, 207–232.Google Scholar
Hume, David (1739): Treatise of Human Nature (3 vols.). Cited as reprinted in Selby-Bigge, Lewis Amherst (ed.) (1888). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, Philip N. (1983): Mental Models. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Jakob, L. H. (1791): Grundriß der allgemeinen Logik und kritische Anfangsgründe zu einer allgemeinen Metaphysik (2nd ed.). Halle: Hemmerde und Schwetschke.Google Scholar
Karsten, Wenceslaus Johann Gustav (1767) [Lehrbegriff]: Lehrbegriff der gesamten Mathematik. Die erste Theil. Greifswald: Röse.Google Scholar
Karsten, Wenceslaus Johann Gustav (1760) [Mathesis]: Mathesis theoretica elementaris. Greifswald: Röse.Google Scholar
Kästner, Abraham Gotthelf (1758) [Anfangsgründe]: Anfangsgründe der Mathematik, Vol. 1. Göttingen: Vandenhoek.Google Scholar
Kästner, Abraham Gotthelf (1764): Anfangsgründe der Arithmetik, Geometrie ebenen und sphärischen Trigonometrie, und Perspectiv. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck.Google Scholar
Kästner, Abraham Gotthelf (1790a): “Was heißt in Euclids Geometrie möglich?” Philosophisches Magazin 2, 391–402.Google Scholar
Kästner, Abraham Gotthelf (1790b): “Über den mathematischen Begriff der Raums,” Philosophisches Magazin 2, 403–419.Google Scholar
Kästner, Abraham Gotthelf (1790c): “Über die geometrischen Axiome,” Philosophisches Magazin 2, 420–430.Google Scholar
Kauppi, Raili (1960): Über die Leibnizsche Logik mit besonderer Berücksichtigung des Problems der Intension und der Extension. Helsinki: Acta Philosophica Fennica.Google Scholar
Kemp-Smith, Norman (1918): A Commentary to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kiesewetter, J. G. (1791) [Grundriß]: Grundriß einer reinen allgemeinen Logik, nach Kantischen Grundsätzen. Berlin: Lagarde.Google Scholar
Kiesewetter, J. G. (1797): Logik zum Gebrauch für Schulen. Berlin: F. T. Lagarde. 2nd ed. (1814) Leipzig: H. A. Köchly.Google Scholar
Kiesewetter, J. G. (1799) [Anfangsgründe]: Die ersten Anfangsgründe der reinen Mathematik. Berlin: Quien.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Philip (1975): “Kant and the Foundations of Mathematics,” The Philosophical Review, 84 (1): 23–50. Reprinted in Posy ed. (1992), 109–131.Google Scholar
Klein, Felix (1939): Elementary Mathematics from an Advanced Standpoint. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Klein, Jacob (1968): Greek Mathematical Thought and the Origin of Algebra. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Kline, Morris (1972): Mathematical Thought from Ancient to Modern Times. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kneale, William and Kneale, Martha (1962): The Development of Logic. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Knorr, Wilbur (1986): The Ancient Tradition of Geometric Problems. Boston: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
Lambert, Johann Heinrich (1764) [Organon]: Neues Organon, oder Gedanken über die Erforschung und Bezeichnung des Wahren und dessen Unterscheidung vom Irrtum und Schein (2 vols.). Leipzig: Wendler.Google Scholar
Lambert, Johann Heinrich (1771) [Architectonic]: Anlage zur Architectonic, Vol. 1. Riga: Hartknock.Google Scholar
Lambert, Johann Heinrich (1786) [Theorie]: “Theorie der Parallellinien,” in Engel, Friedrich and Stäckel, Paul (eds.) (1895): Die Theorie der Parallellinien von Euklid bis auf Gauss. Leipzig: Teubner, 152–207.Google Scholar
Lambert, Johann Heinrich (1915) [Abhandlung]: “Abhandlung vom Criterium Veritatis,” Kant-Studien, Ergänzungsheft 36, 7–64. Partially translated as: “Treatise on the Criterion of Truth” in Watkins, Eric (2009): Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: Background Source Materials. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 233–257.Google Scholar
Laywine, Alison (1998): “Problems and Postulates: Kant on Reason and Understanding,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 36, 279–309.Google Scholar
Laywine, Alison (2010): “Kant and Lambert on Geometrical Postulates in the Reform of Metaphysics,” in Domski, and Dickson, (eds.) (2010), 113–133.Google Scholar
Lebesgue, Henri (1950): Leçons sur les constructions géométriques. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1849–63) [GM]: Mathematische Schriften (7 vols.). Edited by Gerhardt, K. I. Halle: Asher et Comp. Reprinted in 1963, Hildesheim: Georg Olms.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1875–1890) [G]: Die philosophischen Schriften (7 vols.). Edited by Gerhardt, K. I. Berlin: Weidmann. Reprinted in 1965, Hildesheim: Georg Olms.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1968) [General Investigation] General Investigation Concerning the Analysis of Concepts and Truth. Translated and evaluated by O’Briant, Walter H. University of Georgia Monographs, No. 17. Athens: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1969) [L]: Philosophical Papers and Letters (2nd ed.). Translated and edited by Loemker, Leroy. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1989) [AG]: Philosophical Essays. Translated and edited by Ariew, Roger and Garber, Dan. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1996) [New Essays]: New Essays on Human Understanding. Translated by Remnant, Peter and Bennett, Jonathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Locke, John (1979) [Essay]: An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Edited by Nidditch, P. H. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Longuenesse, Béatrice (1998a): Kant and the Capacity to Judge: Sensibility and Discursivity in the Transcendental Analytic of the Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Wolfe, C. T. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Longuenesse, Béatrice (1998b): “Synthèse et donation. Réponse à Michel Fichant,” Philosophie 60, 79–91. Translated as “Synthesis and givenness,” in Longuenesse (2005): Kant on the Human Standpoint. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 64–78.Google Scholar
Lu-Adler, Huaping (2012): Kant’s Conception of Logical Extension and Its Implications. PhD diss., University of California, Davis.Google Scholar
Mancosu, Paolo (1996): Philosophy of Mathematics and Mathematical Practice in the Seventeenth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mancosu, Paolo (1998): From Brouwer to Hilbert: The Debate on the Foundations of Mathematics in the 1920s. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mansion, Paul (1908): “Gauss contra Kant sur la géométrie non euclidienne,” Revue néo-scolastique 15, 441–53.Google Scholar
Martin, Gottfried (1934/1972): Arithmetik und Kombinatorik bei Kant. Berlin: de Gruyter. Translated by Wubnig, Judy (1985) as: Arithmetic and Combinatorics: Kant and His Contemporaries. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Meier, G. F. (1752b) [Auszug]: Auszug aus der Vernunftlehre. Halle: Gebauer. Reprinted in AA16.Google Scholar
Mendelssohn, Moses (1762): “Zweyhundert und achter Brief. Über die Fortsetzung des Versuchs vom Genie,” Briefe, die neueste Litteratur betreffend 13, 3–14.Google Scholar
Mendelssohn, Moses (1764): Abhandlung über die Evidenz in metaphysischen Wissenschaften. Berlin: Royal Academy of Sciences. Reprinted in 1786, Berlin: Haude und Spener. Translated as “On Evidence in Metaphysical Sciences,” in Mendelssohn (1997), 251–306.Google Scholar
Mendelssohn, Moses (1972): Gesammelte Schriften: Schriften zur Philosophie und Ästhetik II. Edited by Bamberger, Fritz and Strauss, Leo. Stuttgart: Friedrich Frommann.Google Scholar
Mendelssohn, Moses (1997): Philosophical Writings. Translated and edited by Dahlstrom, Daniel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Menzel, Alfred (1911): “Die Stellung der Mathematik in Kants vorkritischer Philosophie,” Kant-Studien 16, 139–213.Google Scholar
Mueller, Ian (1981): Philosophy of Mathematics and Deductive Structure in Euclid’s Elements. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Normore, Calvin (1993): “The Necessity in Deduction: Cartesian Inference and its Medieval Background,” Synthese 96, 437–454.Google Scholar
Newton, Isaac (1999): [Principia] The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Translated and edited by Cohen, Bernard and Whitman, Anne, and assisted by Budenz, Julia. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Pariente, Jean-Claude (1985): L’analyse du langage à Port-Royal. Six études logico-grammaticales. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Parker, Matthew (2009): “Philosophical Method and Galileo’s Paradox of Infinity,” in van Kerkhove, Bart (ed.): New Perspectives on Mathematic Practices: Essays in Philosophy and History of Mathematics. Singapore: World Scientific, 76–113.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (1964): “Infinity and Kant’s Conception of the ‘Possibility of Experience’,” Philosophical Review 73, 183–197.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (1969): “Kant’s Philosophy of Arithmetic” in Morgenbesser, Sidney, Suppes, Patrick, and White, M. G. (eds.): Philosophy, Science and Method: Essays in Honor of Ernest Nagel. New York: St. Martins, 568–594. Reprinted with postscript in Parsons (1983), 110–149, and in Posy (ed.) (1992), 43–79.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (1979–1980): “Mathematical Intuition,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series 80, 145–168.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (1983): Mathematics in Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (1984): “Arithmetic and the Categories,” Topoi 3, 109–121. Reprinted with postscript in Posy (ed.) (1992), 135–158, and in Parsons (2012), 42–68.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (1992): “The Transcendental Aesthetic,” in Guyer, (ed.) (1992), 62–100.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (2008): Mathematical Thought and Its Objects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (2010): “Two Studies in the Reception of Kant’s Philosophy of Arithmetic,” in Domski, and Dickson, (eds.) (2010), 135–154. Reprinted in Parsons (2012), 80–99.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (2012): From Kant to Husserl: Selected Essays. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (2016): “Reply to Feferman, Koellner, Tait, and Sieg,” Journal of Philosophy 113, 286–307.Google Scholar
Paulsen, Friedrich (1875): Versuch einer Entwicklungsgeschichte der Kantischen Erkenntnistheorie. Leipzig: Fues.Google Scholar
Poincaré, Henri (1894): “Sur la nature du raisonnement mathématique,” Revue de métaphysique et de morale 2, 371–384. Translated by Halsted, G. B. in Ewald (1996), 2:972–982.Google Scholar
Poincaré, Henri (1900): “Du rôle de l’intuition et de la logique en mathématiques,” in Compte rendu du Deuxiéme congrès international des mathématiciens tenu à Paris du 6 au 12 août 1900. Pais: Gauthier-Villars, 210–22. Translated by Halsted, G. B. in Ewald (1996), 2:1012–1020.Google Scholar
Poincaré, Henri (1905): “Les mathématiques et la logique I,” Revue de metaphysique et de morale 13, 815–35. Translated by Halsted, G. B. in Ewald (1996), 2:1021–1038.Google Scholar
Pollok, Konstantin (2008): “‘An Almost Single Inference’: Kant’s Deduction of the Categories Reconsidered,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 90, 323–345.Google Scholar
Posy, Carl (1981): “The Language of Appearances and Things in Themselves,” Synthese 47, 313–52.Google Scholar
Posy, Carl (1982): “A Free IPC Is a Natural Logic: Strong Completeness for Some Intuitionistic Free Logics,” Topoi, 1, 30–43. Reprinted in Lambert, Karel (ed.) (1991): Philosophical Applications of Free Logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Posy, Carl (1984a): “Kant’s Mathematical Realism,” The Monist 66, 115–134. Revised version in Posy (ed.) (1992), 293–313.Google Scholar
Posy, Carl (1984b): “Transcendental Idealism and Causality,” in Harper, William and Meerbote, Ralf (eds.): Kant on Causality, Freedom and Objectivity. Minnesota: University of Minnesota, 20–41.Google Scholar
Posy, Carl (2000): “Immediacy and the Birth of Reference in Kant: The Case for Space,” in Sher, and Tieszen, (eds.) (2000), 155–185.Google Scholar
Posy, Carl (2008a): “Intuition and Infinity: A Kantian Theme with Echoes in the Foundations of Mathematics,” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 63, 165–193. Reprinted in Massimi, Michela (ed.) (2009): Kant and Philosophy of Science Today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 165–194.Google Scholar
Posy, Carl (2008b): “Autonomy or Authenticity: Leibniz and Kant on Practical Rationality,” in Dascal, Marcelo (ed.): Leibniz, What Kind of Rationalist. Dordrecht: Springer, 293–313.Google Scholar
Posy, Carl (2010): “Man Is the Measure: Kantian Thoughts on the Unities of Self and World,” IYYUN 59, 115–141. Reprinted in Ifergan, Pini (ed.) (2011): The Philosopher in the Public Sphere: Essays for Yirmiyahu Yovel. Jerusalem: HaKibbutz HaMeuhad and Van Leer Jerusalem Institute.Google Scholar
Posy, Carl (2013): “Computability and Constructibility,” in Copeland, B. J., Posy, Carl, and Shagrir, Oron (eds.) (2013): Computability: Turing, Church, and Beyond. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 116–151.Google Scholar
Posy, Carl (ed.) (1992): Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics: Modern Essays. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary (1975): “The Meaning of ‘Meaning’,” in Putnam, Hilary (1975): Mind, Language and Reality, Philosophical Papers, Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 215–271.Google Scholar
Rechter, Ofra (1997): Syntheticity, Intuition and Symbolic Construction in Kant’s Philosophy of Arithmetic. PhD diss., Columbia University.Google Scholar
Rechter, Ofra (2006): “The View from 1763: Kant on the Arithmetical Method before Intuition,” in Carson, and Huber, (eds.) (2006), 21–46.Google Scholar
Rechter, Ofra (2010): “On Kant on Arithmetic, Time and Irrationals,” in Bacin, , Ferrarin, , La Rocca, , and Ruffing, (eds.) (2013), 1:209–222.Google Scholar
Reich, Klaus (1986): Die Vollständigkeit der kantischen Urteilstafel (3rd ed.). Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, Hans (1936): “Logical Empiricism in Germany and the Present State of Its Problems,” Journal of Philosophy 33, 141–160.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, Hans (1959): “The Present State of the Discussion of Relativity,” in Modern Philosophy of Science: Selected Essays by Hans Reichenbach. Translated and edited by Reichenbach, Maria. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1–45.Google Scholar
Reusch, J. P. (1741): Systema logicum antiquiorum atque recentiorum item propria praecepta exhibens (2nd ed.). Jenae: Croeker.Google Scholar
Robinson, Hoke (ed.) (1995): Proceedings of the Eighth International Kant Congress. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press.Google Scholar
Rosier-Catach, Irène (2014): “Les Médiévaux et Port-Royal sur l’analyse de la formule de la consécration eucharistique,” in Archaimbault, Sylvie Fournier, Jean-Marie, and Raby, Valérie (eds.): Penser l’histoire des savoirs linguistiques: Hommage à Sylvain Auroux. Lyon: ENS Éditions, 535–555.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand (1897): An Essay on the Foundations of Geometry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand (1903): The Principles of Mathematics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2nd ed.: (1938). New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand (1920): Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Saccheri, Girolamo (1920) [Euclides]: Euclides Vindicatus. Translated by Halsted, George Bruce. Chicago: Open Court. (1920 ed. With reproduction of t.-p. of original edition, 1733. Latin and English on opposite pages.)Google Scholar
Sanderson, Robert (1618): Logicae Artis Compendium. Oxford: Lichfield and Short. Reprinted in 1985, edited by Ashworth, E. J. Bologna: Cooperativa Libraria Universitaria Editrice Bologna.Google Scholar
Schönfeld, Martin (2000): The Philosophy of the Young Kant: The Pre-critical Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schulthess, Peter (1981): Relation und Funktion: Eine systematische und entwicklungsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zur theoretischen Philosophie Kants. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schultz, Johann (1784) [Entdeckte]: Entdeckte Theorie der Parallelen. Königsberg: Kanter.Google Scholar
Schultz, Johann (1789, 1792) [Prüfung]: Prüfung der kantischen Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Königsberg: Hartung.Google Scholar
Segner, Johann Andreas von (1739) [Elementa]: Elementa Arithmeticae et Geometriae. Göttingen: Cuno.Google Scholar
Shabel, Lisa (1998): “Kant on the ‘Symbolic Construction’ of Mathematical Concepts,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 29, 589–621.Google Scholar
Shabel, Lisa (2003): Mathematics in Kant’s Critical Philosophy: Reflections on Mathematical Practice. Studies in Philosophy Outstanding Dissertations series, Robert Nozick, ed. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sher, Gila and Tieszen, Richard (eds.) (2000): Between Logic and Intuition: Essays in Honor of Charles Parsons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sieg, Wilfried (2016): “On Tait on Kant and Finitism,” Journal of Philosophy 113, 274–285.Google Scholar
Smith, Justin (2011): Divine Machines: Leibniz and the Sciences of Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Stein, Howard (1990): “Eudoxus, and Dedekind: On the Ancient Greek Theory of Ratios and Its Relation to Modern Mathematics,” Synthese 84, 163–211.Google Scholar
Sutherland, Daniel (2004a): “The Role of Magnitude in Kant’s Critical Philosophy,” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 34, 411–442.Google Scholar
Sutherland, Daniel (2004b): “Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics and the Greek Mathematical Tradition,” Philosophical Review 113, 157–201.Google Scholar
Sutherland, Daniel (2005): “The Point of Kant’s Axioms of Intuition,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86, 135–159.Google Scholar
Sutherland, Daniel (2006): “Kant on Arithmetic, Algebra, and the Theory of Proportions,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 44, 533–558.Google Scholar
Sutherland, Daniel (2008): “From Kant to Frege: Numbers, Pure Units, and the Limits of Conceptual Representation,” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 63, 135–64.Google Scholar
Sutherland, Daniel (2010): “Philosophy, Geometry, and Logic in Leibniz, Wolff, and the Early Kant,” in Domski, and Dickson, (eds.), 155–192.Google Scholar
Sutherland, Daniel (2017): “Kant’s Conception of Number”, Philosophical Reviews 126, 147–190.Google Scholar
Taisbak, Christian M. (2000): Dedomena: Euclid’s Data, or, the Importance of Being Given. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.Google Scholar
Tait, William W. (1996): “Frege against Cantor and Dedekind: On the Concept of Number,” in Schirn, Matthias (ed.): Frege: Importance and Influence. Berlin: de Gruyter, 70–113. Reprinted in Tait (2005), 212–251.Google Scholar
Tait, William W. (2000): “Cantor’s Grundlagen and the Paradoxes of Set Theory,” in Sher, and Tieszen, (eds.) (2000), 269–290. Reprinted in Tait (2005), 252–275.Google Scholar
Tait, William W. (2005): The Provenance of Pure Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tetens, J. N. (1777): Philosophische Versuche über die menschliche Natur und ihre Entwicklung (2 vols.). Leipzig: Weidmanns, Erben und Reich. Reprinted in 1979, Hildesheim: Georg Olms.Google Scholar
Thompson, Manley (1972): “Singular Terms and Intuitions in Kant’s Epistemology,” Review of Metaphysics 26, 314–343. Reprinted in Posy (ed.) (1992), 81–107.Google Scholar
Tolley, Clinton (2012): “Bolzano and Kant on the Nature of Logic,” History and Philosophy of Logic 33, 307–327.Google Scholar
Tonelli, Giorgio (1959): “Der Streit über die mathematische Methode in der Philosophie in der ersten Hälfte des 18. Jahrhunderts,” Archiv für Philosophie 9, 37–66.Google Scholar
Vaihinger, H. (1881, 1892): Commentar zu Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft (2 vols.). Stuttgart: Spemann.Google Scholar
van Atten, Mark (2012): “Kant and Real Numbers,” in Dybjer, Peter, Lindström, Sten, Palmgren, Erik, and Sundholm, B. G. (eds.), Epistemology Versus Ontology: Essays in the Philosophy of Mathematics in Honor of Per Martin-Löf. Dordrecht: Springer, 3–21.Google Scholar
Vilkko, Risto and Hintikka, Jaakko (2006): “Kant and the Development of Modern Logic,” in Lenk, Hans and Wiehl, Reiner (eds.) (2006): Kant Today – Kant aujourd’hui – Kant heute: Results of the IIP Conference. Berlin: Lit Verlag, 112–126.Google Scholar
Vuillemin, Jules (1960): Mathématiques et métaphysiques chez Descartes. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Webb, Judson C. (2006): “Hintikka on Aristotelean Constructions, Kantian Intuitions and Peircean Theorems,” in Auxier, E. R. and Hahn, L. E. (eds.): The Philosophy of Jaakko Hintikka. Chicago: Open Court, 195–265.Google Scholar
Weil, André (1983): Number Theory: An Approach through History from Hammurapi to Legendre. Boston: Birkhauser.Google Scholar
Whitehead, Alfred (1919): An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Natural Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Whitehead, Alfred (1920): The Concept of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Margaret D. (1967): “Leibniz and Locke on ‘First Truths’,” Journal of the History of Ideas 27, 347–366.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1921) [Tractatus]: “Logisch-Philosophische Abhandlung”, in Annalen der Naturphilosophie 14. Translated by Pears, D. F. and McGuinness, B. F. (1961) as: Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1710) [Anfangs-Gründe]: Der Anfangs-Gründe aller mathematischen Wissenschaften. Halle: Renger. Reprinted in GW, 1:12 (1999).Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1712) [German Logic]: Vernünfftige Gedancken von den Kräften des menschlichen Verstandes. Halle: Renger. Reprinted in GW, 1:1 (1973).Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1719) [German Metaphysics]: Vernünfftige Gedancken von Gott, der Welt und der Seele des Menschen. Halle: Renger. Reprinted in GW, 1:9 (1973).Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1728a): “Monitum de sua Philosophandi ratione, inserviens loco responsionis de ea, quae occasione operis sui Logici non nemo monuit in Actis Eruditorum anni 1728,” Acta Eruditorum, 546–551. Reprinted in GW, 2:35 (1974).Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1728b) [Auszug]: Auszug aus den Anfangsgründen aller mathematischen Wissenschaften (3rd ed.). Frankfurt: Renger. Reprinted in GW, 1:25 (2009).Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1730) [Elementa]: Elementa Matheseos Universae. Halle: Renger. Reprinted in GW, 2:29 (2003).Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1732) [Empirical Psychology]: Psychologia empirica methodo scientifica pertractata (2nd ed.). Reprinted in GW, 2:5 (1968).Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1734) [Lexicon]: Vollständiges Mathematisches Lexicon. Leipzig: Gleditsch. Reprinted in GW, 1:11 (1965).Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1736) [Latin Logic]: Philosophia rationalis sive logica, methodo scientifica pertractata et ad usum scientarum atque vitae aptata. Frankfurt: Renger. Reprinted in GW, 2:1.1–1.3 (1983).Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1739) A Treatise of Algebra: with the application of it to a variety of problems in arithmetic, to geometry, trigonometry, and conic sections: with the several methods of solving and constructing equations of the higher kind. Translated by Hanna, John. London: Printed for A. Bettesworth and C. Hitch.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian (1962) [GW]: Gesammelte Werke. Edited by Ecole, Jean, Arndt, H. W., Theis, Robert, Schneiders, Werner, Carboncini-Gavanelli, Sonia. Hildesheim: Georg Olms.Google Scholar
Wolff, Michael (1995): Die Vollständigkeit der kantischen Urteilstafel: Mit einem Essay über Freges Begriffsschrift. Frankfurt: Klostermann.Google Scholar
Yandell, Benjamin H. (2002): The Honors Class: Hilbert's Problems and Their Solvers. Natick, MA: A. K. Peters.Google Scholar
Young, Michael J. (1982): “Kant on the Construction of Arithmetical Concepts,” Kant-Studien 73, 17–46.Google Scholar