It appears that Ackermann's set theory can find a nice interpretation of its primitives in a theory that has logicistic genre. This is a personal work of mine of this issue, its present here.

I think that the main theory is a form of logicistic theory because it can interpret ample amount of mathematics, and because its primarily about predicates, their nature and their extensions. I don't see it less logicistic than Frege's original attempt, which contained predicate extensions. Although mereology is invoked here, but its role, especially in the main system extending AEM, is only auxiliary, to increase clarity, it become important in the fully extended system since Mereology is indeed used in defining extensions of predicates. I'm asking here about whether the basic system presented in the last page of the referred document qualifies for a logicistic program of philosophy of mathematics. and If not then why not? In want sense its far from Frege's original system, I mean as far as logicism is concerned!


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.