Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:56:31.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Philosophical implications of Tarski's work1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Patrick Suppes
Patrick Suppes*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his published work and even more in conversations, Tarski emphasized what he thought were important philosophical aspects of his work. The English translation of his more philosophical papers [56m] was dedicated to his teacher Tadeusz Kotarbiński, and in informal discussions of philosophy he often referred to the influence of Kotarbiński. Also, the influence of Leśniewski, his dissertation adviser, is evident in his early papers. Moreover, some of his important papers of the 1930s were initially given to philosophical audiences. For example, the famous monograph on the concept of truth ([33m], [35b]) was first given as two lectures to the Logic Section of the Philosophical Society in Warsaw in 1930. Second, his paper [33], which introduced the concepts of ω-consistency and ω-completeness as well as the rule of infinite induction, was first given at the Second Conference of the Polish Philosophical Society in Warsaw in 1927. Also [35c] was based upon an address given in 1934 to the conference for the Unity of Science in Prague; [36] and [36a] summarize an address given at the International Congress of Scientific Philosophy in Paris in 1935. The article [44a] was published in a philosophical journal and widely reprinted in philosophical texts. This list is of course not exhaustive but only representative of Tarski's philosophical interactions as reflected in lectures given to philosophical audiences, which were later embodied in substantial papers. After 1945 almost all of Tarski's publications and presentations are mathematical in character with one or two minor exceptions. This division, occurring about 1945, does not, however, indicate a loss of interest in philosophical questions but is a result of Tarski's moving to the Department of Mathematics at Berkeley. There he assumed an important role in the development of logic within mathematics in the United States.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 53 , Issue 1 , March 1988 , pp. 80 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1988

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.)

Footnotes

1

The final version of this paper has benefitted from the excellent critical comments 1 received from Solomon Feferman and Robert Vaught, as well as an anonymous referee.

References

REFERENCES

Beth, E. W. [1953] On Padoa's method in the theory of definition, Indagationes Mathematicae, vol. 15, pp. 330–339.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. [1947] Meaning and necessity, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Etchemendy, J. [1988] Tarski on truth and logical consequence, this Journal, vol. 53, pp. 51–79.Google Scholar
Gödel, K. [1931] über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandte Systeme. I, Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik, vol. 38, pp. 173–198; English translation in From Frege to Gödel: a source book in mathematical logic, 1879–1931 (J. van Heijenoort, editor), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1967, pp. 596–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilbert, D. [1897] Grundlagen der Geometrie, Teubner, Leipzig (7th ed., 1930).Google Scholar
Hodges, W. [1986] Truth in a structure, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series, vol. 86, pp. 135–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanger, S. [1957a] Provability in logic, Stockholm Studies in Philosophy, vol. 1, Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Kanger, S. [1957b] The morning star paradox, Theoria, vol. 23, pp. 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanger, S. [1957c] A note on quantification and modalities, Theoria, vol. 23, pp. 133–134.Google Scholar
Kripke, S. [1959] A completeness theorem in modal logic, this Journal, vol. 24, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
Kripke, S. [1963a] Semantical analysis of modal logic, I: Normal modal propositional calculi, Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 9, pp. 67–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kripke, S. [1963b] Semantical considerations on modal logics, Acta Philosophica Fennica, vol. 16, pp. 83–94.Google Scholar
Löwenheim, L. [1915] Über Möglichkeiten im Relativkalkül, Mathematische Annalen, vol. 76, pp. 447–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montague, R. [1974] Formal philosophy(Thomason, R., editor), Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.Google Scholar
Nagel, E. [1939] The formation of modern conceptions of formal logic in the development of geometry, Osiris, vol. 7, pp. 142–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicod, J. [1924] La géométrie dans le monde sensible, Librairie Félix Alcan, Paris (reprint, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1962).Google Scholar
Padoa, A. [1902] Un nouveau système irréductible de postulats pour l’algèbre, Comptes rendus du deuxième congrès international des mathématiciens (Paris, 1900), Gauthier-Villars, Paris, pp. 249–256.Google Scholar
Padoa, A. [1903] Le probleme no. 2 de M. David Hilbert, L’Enseignement Mathématique, vol. 5, pp. 85–91.Google Scholar
Pasch, M. [1882] Vorlesungen über neuere Geometrie, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (2nd ed., 1926).Google Scholar
Robb, A. A. [1911] Optical geometry of motion: a new view of the theory of relativity, W. Heffer and Sons, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Robb, A. A. [1936] Geometry of time and space, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Szczerba, L. W. [1986] Tarski and geometry, this Journal, vol. 51, pp. 907–912.Google Scholar
Vaught, R. L. [1986] Alfred Tarski's work in model theory, this Journal, vol. 51, pp. 869–882.Google Scholar
Veblen, O. and Young, J. W. [1910] Projective geometry, Ginn, Boston, Massachusetts (2 vols., second 1918); reprint, Blaisdell, New York, 1938.Google Scholar
Wagon, S. [1985] The Banach-Tarski paradox, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, A. N. [1919] An enquiry concerning the principles of natural knowledge, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar