Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-rj9fg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-09T01:30:46.998Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On some concepts associated with finite cardinal numbers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2008

Harold T. Hodes
Harold T. Hodes
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY [email protected]://www.arts.cornell.edu/phil/people/faculty/?id=9/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I catalog several concepts associated with finite cardinals, and then invoke them to interpret and evaluate several passages in Rips et al.'s target article. Like the literature it discusses, the article seems overly quick to ascribe the possession of certain concepts to children (and of set-theoretic concepts to non-mathematicians).

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 31 , Issue 6 , December 2008 , pp. 657 - 658
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barwise, J. & Etchemendy, J. (1999) Language, proof and logic. Seven Bridges Press.Google Scholar
Bloom, P. (2000) How children learn the meaning of words. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodes, H. (2004) On the sense and reference of a logical constant. Philosophical Quarterly 54(214): 134–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKay, T. (2006) Plural predication. Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peacocke, C. (1992) A study of concepts. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Peacocke, C. (1996) Can possession conditions individuate concepts? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 56(2):433–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peacocke, C. (2005) The a priori. In: The Oxford handbook of contemporary philosophy, ed. Jackson, F. & Smith, M., pp. 739–64. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar