Project:About Wittgenstein: Difference between revisions

Line 37:

== Individual works ==

• Review of P. Coffey, ''The science of logic''

{{Drawer|title=Review of P. Coffey, ''The science of logic''

|content= In 1913, Wittgenstein published a very short review of philosopher and mathematician Peter Coffey’s ''The science of logic'' in ''The Cambridge Review'' (vol. 34, no. 853, 6 Mar. 1913, p. 351). In an openly ironic tone, Wittgenstein argues against the antiquated views of the author and the inaccuracies of the logical notions he expresses, some of which – such as the subject-predicate form of the proposition, the relationship between thought and reality, and the logical-semantic function of the verb “to be” – will have an important development in Wittgenstein’s own later works.

In 1913, Wittgenstein published a very short review of philosopher and mathematician Peter Coffey’s ''The science of logic'' in ''The Cambridge Review'' (vol. 34, no. 853, 6 Mar. 1913, p. 351). In an openly ironic tone, Wittgenstein argues against the antiquated views of the author and the inaccuracies of the logical notions he expresses, some of which – such as the subject-predicate form of the proposition, the relationship between thought and reality, and the logical-semantic function of the verb “to be” – will have an important development in Wittgenstein’s own later works.

Go to [[Review of P. Coffey, “The Science of Logic”|Review of P. Coffey, ''The science of logic'']]}}

Go to [[Review of P. Coffey, “The Science of Logic”|Review of P. Coffey, ''The science of logic'']]

@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 == Individual works ==
-• Review of P. Coffey, ''The science of logic''
+{{Drawer|title=Review of P. Coffey, ''The science of logic''
+|content= In 1913, Wittgenstein published a very short review of philosopher and mathematician Peter Coffey’s ''The science of logic'' in ''The Cambridge Review'' (vol. 34, no. 853, 6 Mar. 1913, p. 351). In an openly ironic tone, Wittgenstein argues against the antiquated views of the author and the inaccuracies of the logical notions he expresses, some of which – such as the subject-predicate form of the proposition, the relationship between thought and reality, and the logical-semantic function of the verb “to be” – will have an important development in Wittgenstein’s own later works.
-In 1913, Wittgenstein published a very short review of philosopher and mathematician Peter Coffey’s ''The science of logic'' in ''The Cambridge Review'' (vol. 34, no. 853, 6 Mar. 1913, p. 351). In an openly ironic tone, Wittgenstein argues against the antiquated views of the author and the inaccuracies of the logical notions he expresses, some of which – such as the subject-predicate form of the proposition, the relationship between thought and reality, and the logical-semantic function of the verb “to be” – will have an important development in Wittgenstein’s own later works.
+Go to [[Review of P. Coffey, “The Science of Logic”|Review of P. Coffey, ''The science of logic'']]}}
-Go to [[Review of P. Coffey, “The Science of Logic”|Review of P. Coffey, ''The science of logic'']]