References

1873 – Über eine geometrische Darstellung der imaginären Gebilde in der Ebene. PhD Dissertation, University of Göttingen.Google Scholar

1874a – Rechnungsmethoden, die sich auf eine Erweiterung des Größenbegriffes gründen. Habilitationsschrift, University of Jena.Google Scholar

1874b – “Rezension von: H. Seeger, Die Elemente der Arithmetik, für den Schulunterricht bearbeitet,” Jenaer Literaturzeitung, 1(46), 722.Google Scholar

1879 – Begriffsschrift, eine der arithmetischen nachgebildete Formelsprache des reinen Denkens. Halle: L. Nebert. (Second edition, Begriffsschrift und andere Aufsätze. Zweite Auflage, mit E. [Edmund] Husserls und H. [Heinrich] Scholz’ Anmerkungen, herausgegeben von Ignacio Angelelli. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1964.)Google Scholar

1884 – Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik, eine logisch mathematische Untersuchung über den Begriff der Zahl. Breslau: W. Koebner.Google Scholar

1885 – “Über formale Theorien der Arithmetik,” Sitzungsberichte der Jenaischen Gesellschaft für Medizin und Naturwissenschaft, 19, 94–104.Google Scholar

1891a – Funktion und Begriff. Jena: Hermann Pohle, 1891.Google Scholar

1891b – “Über das Trägheitsgesetz,” Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 98, 145–61.Google Scholar

1892a – “Über Sinn und Bedeutung,” Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 100, 25–50.Google Scholar

1892b – “Über Begriff und Gegenstand,” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 16, 192–205.Google Scholar

1892c – “Rezension von: G. Cantor, Zur Lehre vom Transfiniten,” Gesammelte Abhandlungen aus der Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 100, 269–72.Google Scholar

1893/1903 – Grundgesetze der Arithmetik, begriffsschriftlich abgeleitet I, II. Two volumes. Jena: Hermann Pohle.Google Scholar

1894 – “Rezension von: E. Husserl, Philosophie der Arithmetik I,” Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 103, 313–32.Google Scholar

1895a – “Kritische Beleuchtung einiger Punkte in E. Schröders Vorlesungen über die Algebra der Logik,” Archiv für systematische Philosophie, 1, 433–56.Google Scholar

1895b – “Le nombre entier,” Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 3, 73–78.Google Scholar

1897 – “Über die Begriffsschrift des Herrn Peano und meine eigene,” Verhandlungen der Königlich Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, 48, 362–68.Google Scholar

1899 – Über die Zahlen des Herrn H. Schubert. Jena: Hermann Pohle.Google Scholar

1903 – Grundgesetze II, see the entry dated 1893/1903 above.Google Scholar

1903/1906 – “Über die Grundlagen der Geometrie,” Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung, 12 (1903): 319–24, 368–75; 15 (1906): 293–309, 377–403, 423–30.Google Scholar

1904 – “Was ist eine Funktion?” In Festschrift Ludwig Boltzmann gewidmet zum sechzigsten Geburtstage. Leipzig: Verlag von Ambrosius Barth. 656–66Google Scholar

1906 – “Antwort auf die Ferienplauderei des Herrn Thomae,” Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung, 15, 586–90.Google Scholar

1908 – “Die Unmöglichkeit der Thomaeschen formalen Arithmetik aus Neue nachgewiesen,” Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung, 17, 52–55.Google Scholar

1918a – “Der Gedanke. Eine logische Untersuchung,” Beträge zur Philosophie des deutschen Idealismus, 1, 58–77.Google Scholar

1918b – “Die Verneinung. Eine logische Untersuchung,” Beiträge zur Philosophie des deutschen Idealismus, 1, 143–57.Google Scholar

1923 – “Gedankengefüge” (“Logische Untersuchungen – Dritter Teil: Gedankengefüge”), Beiträge zur Philosophie des deutschen Idealismus, 3, 36–51.Google Scholar

1969 – Nachgelassene Schriften. Ed. Hans Hermes, Friedrich Kambartel, and Friedrich Kaulbach. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.Google Scholar

1976 – Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.Google Scholar

1989 – “Briefe an Ludwig Wittgenstein aus den Jahren 1914–1920.” Ed. Janik, Allan, with commentary by Berger, Christian Paul. In Wittgenstein in Focus – Im Brennpunkt: Wittgenstein. Ed. McGuinness, Brian and Haller, Rudolf. Special issue, Grazer Philosophische Studien, 33/34, 5–33.Google Scholar

1994 – “Gottlob Freges politisches Tagebuch.” Ed. Gabriel, Gottfried and Kienzler, Wolfgang, with an introduction and commentary. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 42, 1057–98 (editors’ introduction 1057–66).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege [BG]. Third edition. Trans. Black, Max and Geach, P. T.. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 1980.Google Scholar

Collected Papers on Mathematics, Logic and Philosophy [CP]. Ed. Black, Max, Dudman, V., Geach, P. T., Kaal, H., Kluge, E.-H. W., McGuinness, Brian, and Stoothoff, R. H.. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1984.Google Scholar

The Frege Reader [FR]. Ed. Beaney, Michael. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997.Google Scholar

Über eine geometrische Darstellung der imaginären Gebilde in der Ebene [1873]. Translated as “On a Geometrical Representation of Imaginary Forms in the Plane” in [CP]: 1–55.Google Scholar

Rechnungsmethoden, die sich auf eine Erweiterung des Größenbegriffes gründen [1874]. Translated as “Methods of Calculation Based on an Extension of the Concept of Quantity” in [CP]: 56–92.Google Scholar

Begriffsschrift [1879]. Translated as “Begriffsschrift, a Formula Language, Modeled upon That of Arithmetic, for Pure Thought” by Bauer-Mengelberg, S.. In From Frege to Gödel: A Sourcebook in Mathematical Logic 1879–1931. Ed. van Heijenoort, Jean. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967. 1–82. Translated as Conceptual Notation and Related Articles by Bynum, Terrell W.. London: Oxford University Press, 1972.Google Scholar

Grundlagen [1884]. Translated as The Foundations of Arithmetic: A Logico-Mathematical Enquiry into the Concept of Number by Austin, J. L.. Oxford: Blackwell, 1953 (second edition). Translated with an introduction and critical commentary as The Foundations of Arithmetic: A Logico-Mathematical Investigation into the Concept of Number by Jacquette, Dale. New York: Pearson Longman, 2007.Google Scholar

“Über formale Theorien der Arithmetik” [1885]. Translated as “On Formal Theories of Arithmetic” in [CP]: 112–21.Google Scholar

“Erwiderung” [to Cantor 1885, Deutsche Literaturzeitung, 6(20), columns 728–29]. Translated as “Reply to Cantor’s Review of Grundlagen der Arithmetik” in [CP]: 122.Google Scholar

“Funktion und Begriff” [1891]. Translated as “Function and Concept” in [CP]: 137–56; [BG]: 21–41; [FR]: 130–48.Google Scholar

“Über das Trägheitsgesetz” [1891]. Translated as “On the Law of Inertia” in [CP]: 123–36.Google Scholar

“Über Sinn und Bedeutung” [1892]. Translated as “On Sense and Meaning” in [CP]: 157–77. Translated as “On Sense and Reference” in [BG]: 56–78; [FR]: 151–71.Google Scholar

“Über Begriff und Gegenstand” [1892]. Translated as “On Concept and Object” in [CP]: 182–94; [BG]: 42–55; [FR]: 181–93.Google Scholar

“Rezension von: G. Cantor, Zur Lehre vom Transfiniten” [1892]. Translated as “Review of Georg Cantor, Contributions to the Theory of the Transfinite” in [CP]: 178–81.Google Scholar

Grundgesetze [1893/1903]. Edited and translated in part (Volume I plus Volume II Nachwort) as The Basic Laws of Arithmetic: Exposition of the System by Furth, Montgomery. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1964. Edited and translated in its entirety as Basic Laws of Arithmetic: Derived Using Concept-Script by Ebert, Philip A. and Rossberg, Marcus with Wright, Crispin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.Google Scholar

“Rezension von: E. Husserl, Philosophie der Arithmetik” [1894]. Translated as “Review of Philosophie der Arithmetik by Edmund Husserl” in [CP]: 195–209. Translated as “Illustrative Extracts from Frege’s Review of Husserl’s Philosophy der Arithmetik” in [BG]: 79–85; [FR]: 224–26 (extract). Translated as “Review of Dr. E. Husserl’s Philosophy of Arithmetic” by Kluge, E. W., Mind, 81 (1972): 321–37.Google Scholar

“Kritische Beleuchtung einiger Punkte in E. Schröders Vorlesungen über die Algebra der Logik” [1895]. Translated as “A Critical Elucidation of Some Points in E. Schröder, Vorlesungen über die Algebra der Logik [Lectures on the Algebra of Logic]” in [CP]: 210–28; [BG]: 86–106.Google Scholar

“Le nombre entier” [1895]. Translated as “Whole Numbers” in [CP]: 229–33.Google Scholar

“Über die Begriffsschrift des Herrn Peano und meine eigene” [1897]. Translated as “On Mr. Peano’s Conceptual Notation and My Own” in [CP]: 234–48.Google Scholar

“Über die Zahlen des Herrn H. Schubert” [1899]. Translated as “On Mr. H. Schubert’s Numbers” in [CP]: 249–72.Google Scholar

“Über die Grundlagen der Geometrie” [1903/1906]. Translated as “On the Foundations of Geometry” in [CP]: 273–340. Translated as On the Foundations of Geometry and Formal Theories of Arithmetic by Kluge, E. W.. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971.Google Scholar

“Was ist eine Funktion?” [1904]. Translated as “What is a Function?” in [CP]: 285–92.Google Scholar

“Antwort auf die Ferienplauderei des Herrn Thomae” [1906]. Translated as “Reply to Thomae’s Holiday Causerie” in [CP]: 341–45.Google Scholar

“Die Unmöglichkeit der Thomaeschen formalen Arithmetik aufs Neue nachgewiesen” [1908]. Translated as “Renewed Proof of the Impossibility of Mr. Thomae’s Formal Arithmetic” in [CP]: 346–50.Google Scholar

Logical Investigations [LI]. Translated by Geach, P. T. (from Frege 1918a, b and 1923). New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977.Google Scholar

“Der Gedanke. Eine logische Untersuchung” [1918]. Translated as “Thoughts” in [CP]: 351–72; [LI]: 1–30. Translated as “Thought” in [FR]: 325–45.Google Scholar

“Die Verneinung. Eine logische Untersuchung” [1918]. Translated as “Negation” in [CP]: 373–89; [LI]: 31–53; [FR]: 346–61.Google Scholar

“Gedankengefüge” [1923]. Translated as “Compound Thoughts” in [CP]: 390–406; [LI]: 55–77.Google Scholar

“Gottlob Freges politisches Tagebuch” [1994]. Translated as “Diary: Written by Professor Dr. Gottlob Frege in the Time from 10 March to 9 April 1924” by Mendelsohn, Richard L., in Inquiry 39 (1996): 303–42 (editors’ introduction by Gabriel, G. and Kienzler, W., 303–8).Google Scholar

Nachgelassene Schriften [1969]. Translated as Posthumous Writings [PW] by Long, Peter and White, Roger. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1979.Google Scholar

“Boole’s Logical Calculus and the Concept-Script” in [PW]: 9–46.Google Scholar

“Boole’s Logical Formula-Language and My Concept-Script” in [PW]: 47–52.Google Scholar

“Draft towards a Review of Cantor’s Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur Lehre vom Transfiniten” in [PW]: 68–71.Google Scholar

“Logic” in [PW]: 126–51.Google Scholar

“On Euclidean Geometry” in [PW]: 167–69.Google Scholar

“Notes on Hilbert’s ‘Grundlagen der Geometrie’” in [PW]: 170–3.Google Scholar

“Logic in Mathematics” in [PW]: 203–50.Google Scholar

“Notes for Ludwig Darmstaedter” in [PW]: 253–57.Google Scholar

“Logical Generality” in [PW]: 258–62.Google Scholar

“Number” in [PW]: 265–66.Google Scholar

“Numbers and Arithmetic” in [PW]: 275–77.Google Scholar

On the Foundations of Geometry and Formal Theories of Arithmetic. Trans. Kluge, E. W.. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971.Google Scholar

Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel [1976]. Translated as Philosophical and Mathematical Correspondence by Kaal, Hans. Ed. McGuinness, Brian. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.Google Scholar

1873 – Über eine geometrische Darstellung der imaginären Gebilde in der Ebene. PhD Dissertation, University of Göttingen.Google Scholar

1874a – Rechnungsmethoden, die sich auf eine Erweiterung des Größenbegriffes gründen. Habilitationsschrift, University of Jena.Google Scholar

1874b – “Rezension von: H. Seeger, Die Elemente der Arithmetik, für den Schulunterricht bearbeitet,” Jenaer Literaturzeitung, 1(46), 722.Google Scholar

1879 – Begriffsschrift, eine der arithmetischen nachgebildete Formelsprache des reinen Denkens. Halle: L. Nebert. (Second edition, Begriffsschrift und andere Aufsätze. Zweite Auflage, mit E. [Edmund] Husserls und H. [Heinrich] Scholz’ Anmerkungen, herausgegeben von Ignacio Angelelli. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1964.)Google Scholar

1884 – Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik, eine logisch mathematische Untersuchung über den Begriff der Zahl. Breslau: W. Koebner.Google Scholar

1885 – “Über formale Theorien der Arithmetik,” Sitzungsberichte der Jenaischen Gesellschaft für Medizin und Naturwissenschaft, 19, 94–104.Google Scholar

1891a – Funktion und Begriff. Jena: Hermann Pohle, 1891.Google Scholar

1891b – “Über das Trägheitsgesetz,” Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 98, 145–61.Google Scholar

1892a – “Über Sinn und Bedeutung,” Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 100, 25–50.Google Scholar

1892b – “Über Begriff und Gegenstand,” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 16, 192–205.Google Scholar

1892c – “Rezension von: G. Cantor, Zur Lehre vom Transfiniten,” Gesammelte Abhandlungen aus der Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 100, 269–72.Google Scholar

1893/1903 – Grundgesetze der Arithmetik, begriffsschriftlich abgeleitet I, II. Two volumes. Jena: Hermann Pohle.Google Scholar

1894 – “Rezension von: E. Husserl, Philosophie der Arithmetik I,” Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 103, 313–32.Google Scholar

1895a – “Kritische Beleuchtung einiger Punkte in E. Schröders Vorlesungen über die Algebra der Logik,” Archiv für systematische Philosophie, 1, 433–56.Google Scholar

1895b – “Le nombre entier,” Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 3, 73–78.Google Scholar

1897 – “Über die Begriffsschrift des Herrn Peano und meine eigene,” Verhandlungen der Königlich Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, 48, 362–68.Google Scholar

1899 – Über die Zahlen des Herrn H. Schubert. Jena: Hermann Pohle.Google Scholar

1903 – Grundgesetze II, see the entry dated 1893/1903 above.Google Scholar

1903/1906 – “Über die Grundlagen der Geometrie,” Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung, 12 (1903): 319–24, 368–75; 15 (1906): 293–309, 377–403, 423–30.Google Scholar

1904 – “Was ist eine Funktion?” In Festschrift Ludwig Boltzmann gewidmet zum sechzigsten Geburtstage. Leipzig: Verlag von Ambrosius Barth. 656–66Google Scholar

1906 – “Antwort auf die Ferienplauderei des Herrn Thomae,” Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung, 15, 586–90.Google Scholar

1908 – “Die Unmöglichkeit der Thomaeschen formalen Arithmetik aus Neue nachgewiesen,” Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung, 17, 52–55.Google Scholar

1918a – “Der Gedanke. Eine logische Untersuchung,” Beträge zur Philosophie des deutschen Idealismus, 1, 58–77.Google Scholar

1918b – “Die Verneinung. Eine logische Untersuchung,” Beiträge zur Philosophie des deutschen Idealismus, 1, 143–57.Google Scholar

1923 – “Gedankengefüge” (“Logische Untersuchungen – Dritter Teil: Gedankengefüge”), Beiträge zur Philosophie des deutschen Idealismus, 3, 36–51.Google Scholar

1969 – Nachgelassene Schriften. Ed. Hans Hermes, Friedrich Kambartel, and Friedrich Kaulbach. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.Google Scholar

1976 – Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.Google Scholar

1989 – “Briefe an Ludwig Wittgenstein aus den Jahren 1914–1920.” Ed. Janik, Allan, with commentary by Berger, Christian Paul. In Wittgenstein in Focus – Im Brennpunkt: Wittgenstein. Ed. McGuinness, Brian and Haller, Rudolf. Special issue, Grazer Philosophische Studien, 33/34, 5–33.Google Scholar

1994 – “Gottlob Freges politisches Tagebuch.” Ed. Gabriel, Gottfried and Kienzler, Wolfgang, with an introduction and commentary. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 42, 1057–98 (editors’ introduction 1057–66).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege [BG]. Third edition. Trans. Black, Max and Geach, P. T.. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 1980.Google Scholar

Collected Papers on Mathematics, Logic and Philosophy [CP]. Ed. Black, Max, Dudman, V., Geach, P. T., Kaal, H., Kluge, E.-H. W., McGuinness, Brian, and Stoothoff, R. H.. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1984.Google Scholar

The Frege Reader [FR]. Ed. Beaney, Michael. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997.Google Scholar

Über eine geometrische Darstellung der imaginären Gebilde in der Ebene [1873]. Translated as “On a Geometrical Representation of Imaginary Forms in the Plane” in [CP]: 1–55.Google Scholar

Rechnungsmethoden, die sich auf eine Erweiterung des Größenbegriffes gründen [1874]. Translated as “Methods of Calculation Based on an Extension of the Concept of Quantity” in [CP]: 56–92.Google Scholar

Begriffsschrift [1879]. Translated as “Begriffsschrift, a Formula Language, Modeled upon That of Arithmetic, for Pure Thought” by Bauer-Mengelberg, S.. In From Frege to Gödel: A Sourcebook in Mathematical Logic 1879–1931. Ed. van Heijenoort, Jean. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967. 1–82. Translated as Conceptual Notation and Related Articles by Bynum, Terrell W.. London: Oxford University Press, 1972.Google Scholar

Grundlagen [1884]. Translated as The Foundations of Arithmetic: A Logico-Mathematical Enquiry into the Concept of Number by Austin, J. L.. Oxford: Blackwell, 1953 (second edition). Translated with an introduction and critical commentary as The Foundations of Arithmetic: A Logico-Mathematical Investigation into the Concept of Number by Jacquette, Dale. New York: Pearson Longman, 2007.Google Scholar

“Über formale Theorien der Arithmetik” [1885]. Translated as “On Formal Theories of Arithmetic” in [CP]: 112–21.Google Scholar

“Erwiderung” [to Cantor 1885, Deutsche Literaturzeitung, 6(20), columns 728–29]. Translated as “Reply to Cantor’s Review of Grundlagen der Arithmetik” in [CP]: 122.Google Scholar

“Funktion und Begriff” [1891]. Translated as “Function and Concept” in [CP]: 137–56; [BG]: 21–41; [FR]: 130–48.Google Scholar

“Über das Trägheitsgesetz” [1891]. Translated as “On the Law of Inertia” in [CP]: 123–36.Google Scholar

“Über Sinn und Bedeutung” [1892]. Translated as “On Sense and Meaning” in [CP]: 157–77. Translated as “On Sense and Reference” in [BG]: 56–78; [FR]: 151–71.Google Scholar

“Über Begriff und Gegenstand” [1892]. Translated as “On Concept and Object” in [CP]: 182–94; [BG]: 42–55; [FR]: 181–93.Google Scholar

“Rezension von: G. Cantor, Zur Lehre vom Transfiniten” [1892]. Translated as “Review of Georg Cantor, Contributions to the Theory of the Transfinite” in [CP]: 178–81.Google Scholar

Grundgesetze [1893/1903]. Edited and translated in part (Volume I plus Volume II Nachwort) as The Basic Laws of Arithmetic: Exposition of the System by Furth, Montgomery. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1964. Edited and translated in its entirety as Basic Laws of Arithmetic: Derived Using Concept-Script by Ebert, Philip A. and Rossberg, Marcus with Wright, Crispin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.Google Scholar

“Rezension von: E. Husserl, Philosophie der Arithmetik” [1894]. Translated as “Review of Philosophie der Arithmetik by Edmund Husserl” in [CP]: 195–209. Translated as “Illustrative Extracts from Frege’s Review of Husserl’s Philosophy der Arithmetik” in [BG]: 79–85; [FR]: 224–26 (extract). Translated as “Review of Dr. E. Husserl’s Philosophy of Arithmetic” by Kluge, E. W., Mind, 81 (1972): 321–37.Google Scholar

“Kritische Beleuchtung einiger Punkte in E. Schröders Vorlesungen über die Algebra der Logik” [1895]. Translated as “A Critical Elucidation of Some Points in E. Schröder, Vorlesungen über die Algebra der Logik [Lectures on the Algebra of Logic]” in [CP]: 210–28; [BG]: 86–106.Google Scholar

“Le nombre entier” [1895]. Translated as “Whole Numbers” in [CP]: 229–33.Google Scholar

“Über die Begriffsschrift des Herrn Peano und meine eigene” [1897]. Translated as “On Mr. Peano’s Conceptual Notation and My Own” in [CP]: 234–48.Google Scholar

“Über die Zahlen des Herrn H. Schubert” [1899]. Translated as “On Mr. H. Schubert’s Numbers” in [CP]: 249–72.Google Scholar

“Über die Grundlagen der Geometrie” [1903/1906]. Translated as “On the Foundations of Geometry” in [CP]: 273–340. Translated as On the Foundations of Geometry and Formal Theories of Arithmetic by Kluge, E. W.. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971.Google Scholar

“Was ist eine Funktion?” [1904]. Translated as “What is a Function?” in [CP]: 285–92.Google Scholar

“Antwort auf die Ferienplauderei des Herrn Thomae” [1906]. Translated as “Reply to Thomae’s Holiday Causerie” in [CP]: 341–45.Google Scholar

“Die Unmöglichkeit der Thomaeschen formalen Arithmetik aufs Neue nachgewiesen” [1908]. Translated as “Renewed Proof of the Impossibility of Mr. Thomae’s Formal Arithmetic” in [CP]: 346–50.Google Scholar

Logical Investigations [LI]. Translated by Geach, P. T. (from Frege 1918a, b and 1923). New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977.Google Scholar

“Der Gedanke. Eine logische Untersuchung” [1918]. Translated as “Thoughts” in [CP]: 351–72; [LI]: 1–30. Translated as “Thought” in [FR]: 325–45.Google Scholar

“Die Verneinung. Eine logische Untersuchung” [1918]. Translated as “Negation” in [CP]: 373–89; [LI]: 31–53; [FR]: 346–61.Google Scholar

“Gedankengefüge” [1923]. Translated as “Compound Thoughts” in [CP]: 390–406; [LI]: 55–77.Google Scholar

“Gottlob Freges politisches Tagebuch” [1994]. Translated as “Diary: Written by Professor Dr. Gottlob Frege in the Time from 10 March to 9 April 1924” by Mendelsohn, Richard L., in Inquiry 39 (1996): 303–42 (editors’ introduction by Gabriel, G. and Kienzler, W., 303–8).Google Scholar

Nachgelassene Schriften [1969]. Translated as Posthumous Writings [PW] by Long, Peter and White, Roger. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1979.Google Scholar

“Boole’s Logical Calculus and the Concept-Script” in [PW]: 9–46.Google Scholar

“Boole’s Logical Formula-Language and My Concept-Script” in [PW]: 47–52.Google Scholar

“Draft towards a Review of Cantor’s Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur Lehre vom Transfiniten” in [PW]: 68–71.Google Scholar

“Logic” in [PW]: 126–51.Google Scholar

“On Euclidean Geometry” in [PW]: 167–69.Google Scholar

“Notes on Hilbert’s ‘Grundlagen der Geometrie’” in [PW]: 170–3.Google Scholar

“Logic in Mathematics” in [PW]: 203–50.Google Scholar

“Notes for Ludwig Darmstaedter” in [PW]: 253–57.Google Scholar

“Logical Generality” in [PW]: 258–62.Google Scholar

“Number” in [PW]: 265–66.Google Scholar

“Numbers and Arithmetic” in [PW]: 275–77.Google Scholar

On the Foundations of Geometry and Formal Theories of Arithmetic. Trans. Kluge, E. W.. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971.Google Scholar

Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel [1976]. Translated as Philosophical and Mathematical Correspondence by Kaal, Hans. Ed. McGuinness, Brian. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.Google Scholar

Aczel, Amir D. Descartes’s Secret Notebook: A True Tale of Mathematics, Mysticism, and the Quest to Understand the Universe. New York: Random House, 2005.Google Scholar

Albisetti, James C. Schooling German Girls and Women. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988.Google Scholar

Allwein, Gerard, and Barwise, Jon, eds. Logical Reasoning with Diagrams. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andrews, Peter B. An Introduction to Mathematical Logic and Type Theory: To Truth through Proof. Second edition. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anellis, Irving H. “Did Principia Mathematica Precipitate a ‘Fregean Revolution’?,” Russell: The Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies, 31 (2011): 131–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aristotle, . The Complete Works of Aristotle. Ed. Barnes, Jonathan (Oxford Translation). Fifth printing with corrections, two volumes. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995.Google Scholar

Asser, Günter, Alexander, David, and Metzler, Helmut. “Gottlob Frege – Persönlichkeit und Werk.” In Begriffsschrift – Jenaer Frege-Konferenz. Jena: Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, 1979. 6–32.Google Scholar

Auerbach, Felix. The Zeiss Works and the Carl Zeiss Foundation in Jena, Their Scientific, Technical and Sociological Development and Importance Popularly Described. Trans. Kanthack, Ralph from the fifth German edition. London: W. & G. Foyle, Ltd., 1927.Google Scholar

Baedeker, Karl. Northern Germany as Far as the Bavarian and Austrian Frontiers: Handbook for Travelers. Revised edition. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1910.Google Scholar

Bainton, Roland H. Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther. New York: Plume, 1995.Google Scholar

Baker, G. P., and Hacker, P. M. S.. Frege: Logical Excavations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1984.Google Scholar

Baker, G. P., and Hacker, P. M. S.. “Frege’s Anti-psychologism.” In Perspectives on Psychologism. Ed. Notturno, M. A.. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 1989. 75–127.Google Scholar

Ballue, Eugène. “Le nombre entier: considéré comme fondement de l’analyse mathématique,” Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 2 (1894): 317–28.Google Scholar

Balzac, Honoré. The Unknown Masterpiece and Gambara. Trans. Howard, Richard. Introduction by Danto, Arthur C.. New York: New York Review Books, 2001.Google Scholar

Bauch, Bruno. “Lotzes Logik und ihre Bedeutung im deutschen Idealismus,” Beiträge zur Philosophie des deutschen Idealismus, 1 (1918): 45–58.Google Scholar

Beaney, Michael. “Introduction.” In The Frege Reader. Ed. Beaney, Michael. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997. 1–46.Google Scholar

Berkeley, George. A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge [1710]. In The Works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne. Ed. Luce, A. A. and Jessup, T. E.. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., 1948–1957, 9 volumes. Volume 1.Google Scholar

Berkeley, George. Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous [third edition, 1734]. In Berkeley, , Works, Volume 2.Google Scholar

Bird, Otto A. Syllogistic and Its Extensions. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1964.Google Scholar

Blackburn, Simon, and Code, Alan. “The Power of Russell’s Criticism of Frege: ‘On Denoting’ pp. 48–50,” Analysis, 38(2) (1978): 65–77.Google Scholar

Blackwell, Kenneth, Griffin, Nicholas, and Jacquette, Dale, eds. After “On Denoting” : Themes from Russell and Meinong. Hamilton: McMaster University for The Bertrand Russell Research Centre, 2007.Google Scholar

Blanchette, Patricia A. “Frege and Hilbert on Consistency,” The Journal of Philosophy, 93 (1996): 317–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blanchette, Patricia A. “Frege (1848–1925).” In The Oxford Handbook of German Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century. Ed. Forster, Michael N. and Gjesdal, Kristen. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. 207–29.Google Scholar

Bolzano, Bernard. Theory of Science [Wissenschaftslehre. Versuch einer ausführlichen und größtentheils neuen Darstellung der Logik mit steter Rücksicht auf deren bisherige Bearbeiter, 1837]. Trans. Rusnock, Paul and George, Rolf. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Four volumes.Google Scholar

Boole, George. The Mathematical Analysis of Logic: Being an Essay towards a Calculus of Deductive Reasoning [1847], with a new introduction by Slater, John. Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 1998.Google Scholar

Boole, George. An Investigation of the Laws of Thought on Which Are Founded the Mathematical Theories of Logic and Probabilities [1854]. New York: Dover Publications, 1958.Google Scholar

Boole, George. A Treatise on the Calculus of Finite Differences [1860]. Fourth edition. Ed. Moulton, J. F.. New York: Chelsea Publishing Company, 1872.Google Scholar

Bowie, Andrew. Introduction to German Philosophy: From Kant to Habermas. Oxford: Blackwell, 2003.Google Scholar

Boyer, Carl Benjamin. The History of the Calculus and Its Conceptual Development. New York: Dover Books, 1959.Google Scholar

Brentano, Franz. Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1874.Google Scholar

Brouwer, L. E. J. “The Effect of Intuitionism on Classical Algebra of Logic,” Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, 57 (1955): 113–16.Google Scholar

Burge, Tyler. Truth, Thought, Reason: Essays on Frege. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burge, Tyler. “Gottlob Frege: Some Forms of Influence.” In The Oxford Handbook of the History of Analytic Philosophy. Ed. Beaney, Michael. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. 355–82.Google Scholar

Burgess, John P. Fixing Frege. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burke, Edmund. A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful [1757]. Ed. with an introduction and notes by Phillips, Adam. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.Google Scholar

Bynum, Terrell Ward. “On the Life and Work of Gottlob Frege.” In Frege: Conceptual Notation and Related Articles. Trans. Bynum, Terrell Ward. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972. 1–54.Google Scholar

Cantor, Georg. “Review of Grundlagen der Arithmetik, by Gottlob Frege,” Deutsche Literaturzeitung 6 (1885): 728–29.Google Scholar

Cantor, Georg. “Beiträge zur Begründung der transfiniten Mengenlehre,” Mathematische Annalen, 46(4) (1895): 481–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carl, Wolfgang. Frege’s Theory of Sense and Reference: Its Origins and Scope. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carnap, Rudolf. “Intellectual Autobiography.” In The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap. Ed. Schilpp, Paul. LaSalle: Open Court, 1963.Google Scholar

Carnap, Rudolf. Frege’s Lectures on Logic: Carnap’s Student Notes 1910–1914. Ed. Reck, Erich H. and Awodey, Steve. Introduction by Gabriel, Gottfried. LaSalle: Open Court, 2004.Google Scholar

Church, Alonzo. “An Unsolvable Problem of Elementary Number Theory,” Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 41(5) (1935): 332–33.Google Scholar

Chrudzimski, Arkadiusz. Intentionalitätstheorie beim frühen Brentano. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cocchiarella, Nino. “Whither Russell’s Paradox of Predication.” In Logic and Ontology. Ed. Munitz, Milton K.. New York: New York University Press, 1973. 133–58.Google Scholar

Corcoran, John. “Aristotle’s Demonstrative Logic,” History and Philosophy of Logic, 30 (2009): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Currie, Gregory. “Frege on Thoughts,” Mind, 89(354) (1980): 234–48.Google Scholar

Dauben, Joseph W. “Georg Cantor and Pope Leo XIII: Mathematics, Theology, and the Infinite,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 38 (1977): 85–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

de Maimieux, Joseph. Pasigraphie, ou, Premiers élémens du nouvel art-science d’écrire et d’imprimer en une langue de manière à être lu et entendu dans toute autre langue sans traduction. Paris: Bureau de la Pasigraphie, 1797.Google Scholar

Decker, Christine. Wismar 1665: Eine Stadtgesellschaft im Spiegel des Türkensteuerregisters. Berlin: LIT Verlag, 2006.Google Scholar

Demopoulos, William. “Frege, Hilbert and the Conceptual Structure of Model Theory,” History and Philosophy of Logic, 15(2) (1994): 211–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Demopoulos, William. ed. Frege’s Philosophy of Mathematics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997.Google Scholar

Demopoulos, William. Logicism and Its Philosophical Legacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.Google Scholar

Dipert, Randall R. “The Life and Work of Ernst Schröder,” Modern Logic, 1 (1990–1991): 117–39.Google Scholar

Dudman, Victor, translator and commentator. “Peano’s Review of Frege’s Grundgesetze,” The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 9 (1971): 25–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dummett, Michael. “Frege, Gottlob.” In Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Ed. Edwards, Paul. New York: Macmillan, 1967. Volume III, 225–37.Google Scholar

Dummett, Michael. “Frege on the Consistency of Mathematical Theories.” In Studien zu Frege. Ed. Schirn, Matthias. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog, 1975. 229–42.Google Scholar

Dummett, Michael. Frege: Philosophy of Language [1973]. Second edition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.Google Scholar

Dummett, Michael. The Interpretation of Frege’s Philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.Google Scholar

Dummett, Michael. “Frege and Kant on Geometry,” Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, 25(2) (1982): 233–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dummett, Michael. Frege: Philosophy of Mathematics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991.Google Scholar

Dummett, Michael. “Gottlob Frege.” In Encyclopedia Britannica Online. www.britannica.com/biography/Gottlob-FregeGoogle Scholar

Edwards, Charles Henry Jr. The Historical Development of the Calculus. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eisenstein, Elizabeth. The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communications and Cultural Transformations in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.Google Scholar

Erdmann, Benno. Logik. Band I. Logische Elementarlehre. Halle: Niemeyer, 1892.Google Scholar

Erikson, Erik H. Young Man Luther: A Study in Psychoanalysis and History. Gloucester: Peter Smith Publishing, Inc., 1962.Google Scholar

Eucken, Rudolf. “Review of Grundlagen der Arithmetik, by G. Frege,” Philosophische Monatshefte, 22 (1886): 421–22.Google Scholar

Euclid, . The Elements of Euclid, with Dissertations. Trans. Williamson, James. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1782.Google Scholar

Ewen, Wolfgang. Carl Stumpf und Gottlob Frege. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 2008.Google Scholar

Faerber, Carl. “Referat von Prof. Faerber, Berlin,” Mitteilungen der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung, 39 (1911): 230–31.Google Scholar

Feldman, Gerald D. The Great Disorder: Politics, Economics, and Society in the German Inflation, 1914–1924. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar

Flood, Raymond, Rice, Adrian, and Wilson, Robin, eds. Mathematics in Victorian Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.Google Scholar

Franklin, James. “Aristotelianism in the Philosophy of Mathematics,” Studia Neoaristotelica, 8 (2011): 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gabbay, Dov M., and Woods, John, eds. British Logic in the Nineteenth Century (Handbook of the History of Logic, Volume 4). Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2008.Google Scholar

Gabriel, Gottfried. “Frege als Neukantianer,” Kant-Studien, 77(1) (1986): 84–101.Google Scholar

Gabriel, Gottfried. “Leo Sachse, Herbart, Frege und die Grundlagen der Arithmetik.” In Frege in Jena: Beiträge zur Spurensicherung. Ed. Gabriel, Gottfried and Kienzler, Wolfgang. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1997. 53–67.Google Scholar

Gabriel, Gottfried. “Frege, Lotze, and the Continental Roots of Early Analytic Philosophy.” In From Frege to Wittgenstein: Perspectives on Early Analytic Philosophy. Ed. Reck, Erich H.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gabriel, Gottfried, and Kienzler, Wolfgang, eds. Frege in Jena: Beiträge zur Spurensicherung. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1997.Google Scholar

Gardner, Martin. Logic Machines and Diagrams. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1958.Google Scholar

Gauss, Carl Friedrich. Disquisitiones Arithmeticae. Leipzig: Gerhard Fleischer, 1801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gauss, Carl Friedrich. “Disquisitiones Generales circa Superficies Curvas,” Commentationes Societatis Regiae Scientiarum Gottingensis recentiores 6 (1827): 99–146.Google Scholar

Gauss, Carl Friedrich. Disquisitiones Generales circa Superficies Curvas. Göttingen: Dieterich, 1928.Google Scholar

Geach, P. T. “On Frege’s Way Out,” Mind, 65 (1956): 408–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Geach, P. T. “Frege.” In Three Philosophers. By Anscombe, G. E. M. and Geach, P. T. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1973. 127–62.Google Scholar

George, Alexander and Heck, Richard. “Frege, Gottlob.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Ed. Craig, Edward. London: Routledge, 1998. Volume 3, 765–78.Google Scholar

Giese, Gerd. “Frege und Wismar: Orte der Erinnerung.” In Gottlob Frege – ein Genius mit Wismarer Wurzeln: Leistung – Wirkung – Tradition. Ed. Schott, Dieter. Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag, 2012. 98–111.Google Scholar

Gillies, D. A. Frege, Dedekind, and Peano on the Foundations of Arithmetic. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1982.Google Scholar

Gödel, Kurt. “Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme 1,” Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik, 38 (1931): 173–98.Google Scholar

Griffin, Nicholas. “The Prehistory of Russell’s Paradox.” In One Hundred Years of Russell’s Paradox: Mathematics, Logic, Philosophy. Ed. Link, Godehard and Bell, John L.. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2004. 349–72.Google Scholar

Griffin, Nicholas, and Jacquette, Dale, eds. Russell vs. Meinong: The Legacy of “On Denoting.” London: Routledge, 2009.Google Scholar

Hadamard, Jacques. An Essay on the Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field. New York: Dover Publications, 1954.Google Scholar

Haddock, Guillermo E. Rosado. A Critical Introduction to the Philosophy of Gottlob Frege. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2012.Google Scholar

Hahn, Martin. “The Frege Puzzle One More Time.” In Frege: Sense and Reference One Hundred Years Later. Ed. Biro, John and Kotatko, Petr. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995. 169–83.Google Scholar

Hale, Bob. “Frege’s Platonism,” The Philosophical Quarterly, 34(136) (1984): 225–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harreld, Donald, ed. A Companion to the Hanseatic League. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hawkins, Benjamin S. “DeMorgan, Victorian Syllogistic and Relational Logic,” The Review of Modern Logic, 5(2) (1995): 131–66.Google Scholar

Heblack, Torsten. “Wer war Leo Sachse? Ein historisch-biographischer Beitrag zur Frege-Forschung.” In Frege in Jena: Beiträge zur Spurensicherung. Ed. Gabriel, Gottfried and Kienzler, Wolfgang. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1997. 41–52.Google Scholar

Heck, Richard G., and May, Robert. “Frege’s Contribution to Philosophy of Language.” In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Language. Ed. Lepore, Ernest and Smith, Barry C.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.Google Scholar

Helfferich, Tryntje, ed. The Thirty Years War: A Documentary History. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 2009.Google Scholar

Hellman, Geoffrey. “How to Gödel a Frege–Russell: Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems and Logicism,” Noûs, 15 (1981): 451–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hermes, Hans, Kambartel, Friedrich, and Kaulbach, Friedrich. “History of the Frege Nachlaß and the Basis for This Edition.” In Gottlob Frege, Posthumous Writings. Ed. Hermes, Hans, Kambartel, Friedrich, and Kaulbach, Friedrich. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1979.Google Scholar

Hill, Claire Ortiz, and Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E.. Husserl or Frege? Meaning, Objectivity, and Mathematics. LaSalle: Open Court, 2003.Google Scholar

Hindley, J. Roger. Basic Simple Type Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hochberg, Herbert. “Russell’s Attack on Frege’s Theory of Meaning,” Philosophica, 18 (1976): 9–34.Google Scholar

Hochberg, Herbert. “Russell’s Paradox, Russellian Relations, and the Problems of Predication and Impredicativity,” Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 12 (1989): 63–87.Google Scholar

Holtfrerich, Carl-Ludwig. The German Inflation 1914–1923. Trans. Balderston, Theo. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hopkins, Burt C. “Husserl’s Psychologism and Critique of Psychologism, Revisited,” Husserl Studies, 22 (2006): 91–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hoppe, Ernst Reinhold Eduard. “Review of Frege’s Grundgesetze der Arithmetik I,” Archives of Mathematics and Physics, second series 13. Literary Report XLIX (1895): 8.Google Scholar

Horn, Laurence R. A Natural History of Negation. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information, 2001.Google Scholar

Hume, David. A Treatise of Human Nature [1739–1740]. Second edition. Ed. Sir Selby-Bigge, Lewis Amherst and revised by Nidditch, P. H.. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978.Google Scholar

Hume, David. Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding [1748]. In Hume, David. Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals. Third edition. Ed. Sir Selby-Bigge, Lewis Amherst and revised by Nidditch, P. H.. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hume, David. “My Own Life.” In Mossner, Ernest Campbell. The Life of David Hume. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1954.Google Scholar

Husserl, Edmund. Philosophie der Arithmetik: Psychologische und logische Untersuchungen. Halle: Pfeffer Verlag, 1891.Google Scholar

Husserl, Edmund. Philosophy of Arithmetic: Psychological and Logical Investigations with Supplementary Texts from 1887–1901. Trans. Willard, Dallas. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hylton, Peter. Russell, Idealism, and the Emergence of Analytic Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.Google Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. Wittgenstein’s Thought in Transition. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 1997.Google Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. “Intentionality on the Instalment Plan,” Philosophy, 73 (1998): 63–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. On Boole. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing, 2002.Google Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. ed. Philosophy, Psychology, and Psychologism: Critical and Historical Readings on the Psychological Turn in Philosophy. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. “Introduction: Psychologism the Philosophical Shibboleth.” In Philosophy, Psychology, and Psychologism: Critical and Historical Readings on the Psychological Turn in Philosophy. Ed. Jacquette, Dale. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003. 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. “Psychologism Revisited in Logic, Metaphysics, and Epistemology.” In Philosophy, Psychology, and Psychologism: Critical and Historical Readings on the Psychological Turn in Philosophy. Ed. Jacquette, Dale. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003. 245–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. “Frege on Identity as a Relation of Names,” Metaphysica: International Journal for Ontology and Metaphysics, 12 (2011): 51–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. “Thinking Outside the Square of Opposition Box.” In Around and beyond the Square of Opposition. Ed. Béziau, Jean-Yves and Jacquette, Dale. Basel: Springer-Verlag, 2012. 73–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. “Qualities, Relations, and Property Exemplification,” Axiomathes, 23 (2013): 381–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. “Newton’s Metaphysics of Space as God’s Emanative Effect,” Physics in Perspective, 16 (2014): 344–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. “Toward a Neoaristotelian Inherence Philosophy of Mathematical Entities,” Studia Neoaristotelica, 11 (2014): 159–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. Alexius Meinong: The Shepherd of Non-Being. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquette, Dale. “Referential Analysis of Quotation.” In Semantic and Pragmatic Aspects of Quotation. Ed. Paul Saka. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, forthcoming.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason [1781/1787]. Trans. Guyer, Paul and Wood, Allen W.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. The Groundwork to the Metaphysics of Morals [1785]. Trans. Gregor, Mary and Timmermann, Jens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.Google Scholar

Kanterian, Edward. “Review of Carl Stumpf und Gottlob Frege, by W. Ewen,” Philosophical Investigations, 34 (3) (2011): 312–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kanterian, Edward. Frege: A Guide for the Perplexed. London: Continuum, 2012.Google Scholar

Kenny, Anthony. Frege: An Introduction to the Founder of Modern Analytic Philosophy. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1995.Google Scholar

Kerry, Benno. “Über Anschauung und ihre psychische Verarbeitung,” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 9 (1885): 433–93.Google Scholar

Kerry, Benno. “Über Anschauung und ihre psychische Verarbeitung,” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 10 (1886): 419–67.Google Scholar

Kerry, Benno. “Über Anschauung und ihre psychische Verarbeitung,” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 11 (1887): 53–116.Google Scholar

Kerry, Benno. “Über Anschauung und ihre psychische Verarbeitung,” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 11 (1887): 249–307.Google Scholar

Kerry, Benno. “Über Anschauung und ihre psychische Verarbeitung,” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 13 (1889): 71–124.Google Scholar

Kerry, Benno. “Über Anschauung und ihre psychische Verarbeitung,” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 13 (1889): 392–419.Google Scholar

Kerry, Benno. “Über Anschauung und ihre psychische Verarbeitung,” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 14 (1890): 317–53.Google Scholar

Kerry, Benno. “Über Anschauung und ihre psychische Verarbeitung,” Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 15 (1891): 127–67.Google Scholar

Klement, Kevin C. Frege and the Logic of Sense and Reference. Reprint edition. London: Routledge, 2011.Google Scholar

Kratzsch, Irmgard. “Material zu Leben und Wirken Freges aus dem Besitz der Universitäts-Bibliothek Jena.” In Begriffsschrift – Jenaer Frege-Konferenz. Jena: Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, 1979. 534–46.Google Scholar

Kreiser, Lothar. “G. Frege ‘Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik’ – Werk und Geschichte.” In Frege Conference 1984: Proceedings of the International Conference Held at Schwerin (GDR), September 10–14, 1984. Ed. Wechsung, Gerd. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1984. 13–27.Google Scholar

Kreiser, Lothar. “Alfred.” In Frege in Jena: Beiträge zur Spurensicherung. Ed. Gabriel, Gottfried and Kienzler, Wolfgang. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1997. 68–83.Google Scholar

Kreiser, Lothar. “Freges Universitätsstudium – Warum Jena?” In Frege in Jena: Beiträge zur Spurensicherung. Ed. Gabriel, Gottfried and Kienzler, Wolfgang. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1997. 33–40.Google Scholar

Kreiser, Lothar. “Gottlob Frege: Ein Leben in Jena.” In Gottlob Frege – Werk und Wirkung. Ed. Gabriel, Gottfried and Dathe, Uwe. Paderborn: Mentis, 2000. 9–24.Google Scholar

Kreiser, Lothar. Gottlob Frege: Leben – Werk – Zeit. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kreiser, Lothar. “Die Freges aus Wismar.” In Gottlob Frege – ein Genius mit Wismarer Wurzeln: Leistung – Wirkung – Tradition. Ed. Schott, Dieter. Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag, 2012. 69–97.Google Scholar

Kripke, Saul A. Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language: An Elementary Exposition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982.Google Scholar

Kuehn, Manfred. Kant: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuehn, Manfred. “Kant’s Critical Philosophy and Its Reception – the First Five Years (1781–1786).” In The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy. Ed. Guyer, Paul. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 630–64.Google Scholar

Kusch, Martin. Psychologism: A Case Study in the Sociology of Philosophical Knowledge. London: Routledge, 1995.Google Scholar

Kusch, Martin. A Sceptical Guide to Meaning and Rules: Defending Kripke’s Wittgenstein. Montreal: McGill–Queen’s University Press, 2006.Google Scholar

Landini, Gregory. Frege’s Notations: What They Are and How They Mean. London: Palgrave-Macmillan, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laßwitz, Kurd. “Rezension von Begriffsschrift,” Jenaer Literaturzeitung, 6 (1879): 248–49.Google Scholar

Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. Mathematische Schriften [1850–63]. Ed. Gerhardt, C. J.. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1971.Google Scholar

Lindström, Sten, Palmgren, Erik, Segerberg, Krister, and Stoltenberg-Hansen, Viggo, eds. Logicism, Intuitionism, and Formalism: What Has Become of Them? Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Linsky, Leonard. Referring. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967.Google Scholar

Lotze, Hermann. Grundzüge der Religionsphilosophie. Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1884.Google Scholar

Macbeth, Danielle. Frege’s Logic. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

MacCulloch, Diarmaid. The Reformation. New York: Penguin Books, 2004.Google Scholar

MacFarlane, John. “Frege, Kant, and the Logic in Logicism,” The Philosophical Review, 111 (2002): 25–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Makin, Gideon. The Metaphysicians of Meaning: Russell and Frege on Sense and Denotation. London: Routledge, 2001.Google Scholar

Makin, Gideon. “‘On Denoting’: Appearance and Reality.” In Russell vs. Meinong: The Legacy of “On Denoting.” Ed. Griffin, Nicholas and Jacquette, Dale. London: Routledge, 2009. 78–100.Google Scholar

Massey, Gerald J. “Some Reflections on Psychologism.” In Phenomenology and the Formal Sciences. Ed. Seebohm, Thomas M., Føllesdal, Dagfinn and Mohanty, Jitendranath N.. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishing, 1991. 183–94.Google Scholar

McDonough, Richard. “A Note on Frege’s and Russell’s Influence on Wittgenstein’s Tractatus,” Russell: The Journal of the Bertrand Russell Archives 14 (1994): 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGinn, Colin. Wittgenstein on Meaning: An Interpretation and Evaluation. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1984.Google Scholar

McGuinness, Brian. Wittgenstein: A Life: Young Ludwig 1889–1921. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988.Google Scholar

McGuinness, Brian and Haller, Rudolf, eds. Wittgenstein in Focus – Im Brennpunkt: Wittgenstein. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1989.Google Scholar

Mendelsohn, Richard L. The Philosophy of Gottlob Frege. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Milkov, Nikolay. “Frege in Context” [essay review of Gabriel, and Kienzler, , eds., Frege in Jena (1997)], British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 9 (2001): 557–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mill, John Stuart. A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive [1843]. Ed. Robson, J. M. [Mill, , Collected Works. Volume VII]. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1973.Google Scholar

Mohanty, Jitendranath N. “Husserl and Frege: A New Look at Their Relationship,” Research in Phenomenology, 4(1) (1974): 51–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mohanty, Jitendranath N. Readings on Edmund Husserl’s Logical Investigations. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1977. 22–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mohanty, Jitendranath N. “Husserl, Frege and the Overcoming of Psychologism.” In Philosophy and Science in Phenomenological Perspective. Ed. Cho, K. K.. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1984. 143–52.Google Scholar

Moktefi, Amirouche, and Shin, Sun-Joo, eds. Visual Reasoning with Diagrams. Basel: Birkhäuser Verlag, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Monk, Ray. Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1990.Google Scholar

Nahin, Paul J. An Imaginary Tale: The Story of √−1. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Newton, Isaac. Principia Mathematica Philosophiæ Naturalis. Trans. Cohen, Bernard and Whitman, Anne. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. Volume I.Google Scholar

Newton, Isaac. De Gravitatione et æquipondio fluidorum. In Newton, Isaac. Philosophical Writings. Ed. Janiak, Andrew. Trans. Hall, A. R. and Hall, Marie Boas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. 26–58.Google Scholar

Nidditch, Peter H. “Peano and the Recognition of Frege,” Mind, 72 (1963): 103–10.Google Scholar

Noonan, Harold W. Frege: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2001.Google Scholar

Papineau, David. Philosophical Devices: Proofs, Probabilities, Possibilities, and Sets. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.Google Scholar

Parker, Philip M., ed. Wismar: Webster’s Timeline History, 1348–2007. San Diego: ICON Group International, 2010.Google Scholar

Parsons, Charles. “Frege’s Theory of Number.” In Philosophy in America. Ed. Black, Max. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1965. 180–203.Google Scholar

Peano, Giuseppe. “Dr. Gottlob Frege, Grundgesetze der Arithmetik, begriffsschriftlich abgeleitet, Erster Band, Jena, 1893, pag. XXXII + 254,” Rivista di matematica, 5 (1895): 122–28.Google Scholar

Peano, Giuseppe. Opere scelte. Rome: Edizioni Cremonese, 1959. Volume 2, 187–95.Google Scholar

Peckhaus, Volker. “Benno Kerry: Beiträge zu seiner Biographie,” History and Philosophy of Logic, 15 (1994): 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Peckhaus, Volker. “Schröder’s Logic.” In The Rise of Modern Logic: From Leibniz to Frege. Ed. Gabbay, Dov M. and Woods, John. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1994. 557–609.Google Scholar

Peirce, Charles S. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Ed. Hartshorne, Charles, Weiss, Paul, and Burks, Arthur W.. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1931–1935.Google Scholar

Pelletier, Francis Jeffry, and Linsky, Bernard. “Russell vs. Frege on Definite Descriptions as Singular Terms.” In Russell vs. Meinong: The Legacy of “On Denoting.” Ed. Griffin, Nicholas and Jacquette, Dale. London: Routledge, 2009. 40–64.Google Scholar

Perloff, Marjorie, ed. Wittgenstein’s Ladder: Poetic Language and the Strangeness of the Ordinary. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.Google Scholar

Perry, John. “Frege on Demonstratives,” The Philosophical Review, 86 (4) (1977): 474–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Picardi, Eva. “Kerry und Frege über Begriff und Gegenstand,” History and Philosophy of Logic, 15 (1994): 9–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Poincaré, Henri. “Les mathématiques et la logique,” Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 14 (1906): 294–317.Google Scholar

Poincaré, Henri. “Mathematical Discovery.” In Poincaré, Henri. Science and Method [1908]. Trans. Maitland, Francis. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1914. 46–63.Google Scholar

Posy, Carl J., ed. Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics: Modern Essays. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1982.Google Scholar

Potter, Michael. “Introduction.” In The Cambridge Companion to Frege. Ed. Potter, Michael and Ricketts, Tom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 1–31.Google Scholar

Pratt-Hartmann, Ian. “The Hamiltonian Syllogistic,” Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 20 (4) (2011): 445–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Prescott, George. History, Theory and Practice of the Electric Telegraph. Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1860.Google Scholar

Quine, Willard Van Orman. “On Frege’s Way Out,” Mind, 64 (1955): 145–59.Google Scholar

Quine, Willard Van Orman. Word and Object. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1960.Google Scholar

Quine, Willard Van Orman. “Reference and Modality.” In Quine, Willard Van Orman. From a Logical Point of View. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1961. 139–59.Google Scholar

Quine, Willard Van Orman. “Speaking of Objects.” In Quine, Willard Van Orman. Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. New York: Columbia University Press, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Quine, Willard Van Orman. “The Ways of Paradox.” In Quine, Willard Van Orman. The Ways of Paradox and Other Essays. Revised and enlarged edition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1976.Google Scholar

Quine, Willard Van Orman. Theories and Things. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.Google Scholar

Quine, Willard Van Orman. “Reply to Charles Parsons.” In The Philosophy of W. V. Quine. Ed. Hahn, Lewis Edwin and Schilpp, Paul Arthur. LaSalle: Open Court, 1986. 396–403.Google Scholar

Reck, Erich H. “Wittgenstein’s ‘Great Debt’ to Frege: Biographical Traces and Philosophical Themes.” In From Frege to Wittgenstein: Perspectives on Early Analytic Philosophy. Ed. Reck, Erich H.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. 3–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reck, Erich H., and Awodey, Steve, eds. Frege’s Lectures on Logic: Carnap’s Student Notes 1910–1914. Chicago: Open Court, 2004.Google Scholar

Reed, Delbert. The Origins of Analytic Philosophy: Kant and Frege. London: Continuum, 2007.Google Scholar

Resnik, Michael D. “The Frege–Hilbert Controversy,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 34 (1973): 386–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Resnik, Michael D. Frege and the Philosophy of Mathematics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1980.Google Scholar

Rockmore, Tom. In Kant’s Wake: Philosophy in the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosser, Barkley. “Extensions of Some Theorems of Gödel and Church,” Journal of Symbolic Logic, 1 (1936): 87–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Russell, Bertrand. The Principles of Mathematics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1903.Google Scholar

Russell, Bertrand. “On Denoting,” Mind, 14 (1905): 479–93.Google Scholar

Russell, Bertrand. “Mathematical Logic as Based on a Theory of Types,” American Journal of Mathematics, 30 (1908): 222–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Russell, Bertrand. Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1919.Google Scholar

Russell, Bertrand. Last Philosophical Testament 1943–1968. The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell. Volume 11. Ed. Slater, John G., with the assistance of Köllner, Peter. London: Routledge, 1997.Google Scholar

Ryle, Gilbert. “Meaning and Necessity,” Philosophy, 24 (1949): 69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Salmon, Nathan. Frege’s Puzzle. Atascadero: Ridgeview Publishing Company, 1986.Google Scholar

Santayana, George. Lotze’s System of Philosophy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schildauer, Johannes. The Hansa: History and Culture. Trans. Vanovitch, Katherine. Erfurt: Edition Leipzig, 1985.Google Scholar

Schildt, Franz. Geschichte der Stadt Wismar bis zum Ende des 13. Jahrhunderts [Wismar 1872]. Reprint edition. Charleston: Nabu Press, 2013.Google Scholar

Schirn, Matthias. Frege: Importance and Legacy. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schlote, Karl-Heinz, and Dathe, Uwe. “Die Anfänge von Gottlob Freges wissenschaftlicher Laufbahn,” Historia Mathematica, 21 (2) (1994): 185–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schön, Karl. Friedrich Schiller in Jena 1789–1799: Seine Lebens- und Schaffensjahre in Jena. Munich: BookRix GmbH & Co., 2014.Google Scholar

Schott, Dieter, ed. Gottlob Frege – ein Genius mit Wismarer Wurzeln: Leistung – Wirkung – Tradition. Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag, 2012.Google Scholar

Schröder, Ernst. “Anzeige von Freges Begriffsschrift,” Zeitschrift für Mathematik und Physik, 25 (1881): 81–94.Google Scholar

Schröder, Ernst. Vorlesungen über die Algebra der Logik. Three volumes. Leipzig: B. G. Taubner Verlag, 1890–1910.Google Scholar

Schulte, Joachim. “Frege und Wittgenstein.” In Gottlob Frege – Werk und Wirkung. Ed. Gabriel, Gottfried and Dathe, Uwe. Paderborn: Mentis. 211–26.Google Scholar

Sedwick, Sally. Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.Google Scholar

Shabel, Lisa. Mathematics in Kant’s Critical Philosophy: Reflections on Mathematical Practice. London: Routledge, 2011.Google Scholar

Shapiro, Stewart. “Categories, Structures, and the Frege–Hilbert Controversy: The Status of Meta-mathematics,” Philosophia Mathematica, 13 (2005): 61–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shorto, Russell. Descartes’ Bones: A Skeletal History of the Conflict between Faith and Reason. New York: Random House, 2008.Google Scholar

Simons, Peter. “Judging Correctly: Brentano and the Reform of Elementary Logic.” In The Cambridge Companion to Brentano. Ed. Jacquette, Dale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. 45–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sluga, Hans D. Gottlob Frege [1980]. London: Routledge, 1999.Google Scholar

Sluga, Hans D. “Gottlob Frege: The Early Years.” In Philosophy in History: Essays on the Historiography of Philosophy. Ed. Rorty, Richard, Schneewind, Jerome B., and Skinner, Quentin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. 329–56.Google Scholar

Smith, David Woodruff, and McIntyre, Ronald. Husserl and Intentionality: A Study of Mind, Meaning, and Language. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sobociński, Bolesław. “L’Analyse de l’antinomie russellienne par Leśniewski,” Methodos, 1 (1949): 99–104, 220–28, 308–16; 2 (1950): 237–57.Google Scholar

Spade, Paul Vincent. “Ockham’s Nominalist Metaphysics: Some Main Themes.” In The Cambridge Companion to Ockham. Ed. Spade, Paul Vincent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 100–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Standage, Tom. The Victorian Internet: The Remarkable Story of the Telegraph and the Nineteenth Century’s On-Line Pioneers. Revised second edition. London: Bloomsbury, 2014.Google Scholar

Stelzner, Werner. “Ernst Abbe and Gottlob Frege.” In Frege in Jena: Beiträge zur Spurensicherung. Ed. Gabriel, Gottfried and Kienzler, Wolfgang. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1997. 5–32.Google Scholar

Sternfeld, Robert. Frege’s Logical Theory. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1966.Google Scholar

Struik, Dirk Jan. A Source Book in Mathematics 1200–1800. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969.Google Scholar

Taylor, Brook. Methodus incrementorum directa et inversa [Direct and Reverse Methods of Incrementation]. London: William Innys, 1715.Google Scholar

Thiel, Christian. Sense and Reference in Frege’s Logic. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Twain, Mark. Autobiography of Mark Twain: The Complete and Authoritative Edition. Ed. Smith, Harriet E., Griffin, Benjamin, and Fisher, Victor. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010.Google Scholar

Unwin, Nicholas. “Quasi-Realism, Negation and the Frege–Geach Problem,” The Philosophical Quarterly, 49 (1999): 337–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Venn, John. “Review of Begriffsschrift, by G. Frege,” Mind, 5 (1880): 297.Google Scholar

Vikko, Risto. “The Reception of Frege’s Begriffsschrift,” Historia Mathematica, 25 (1998): 412–22.Google Scholar

Vlastos, Gregory. “The Socratic Elenchus,” The Journal of Philosophy, 79(11) (1982): 711–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vlastos, Gregory. “The Socratic Elenchus,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, 1 (1983): 27–58.Google Scholar

Weber, Max. Die Protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus. [Original publication in Archiv für Sozialwissenschaften und Sozialpolitik 1904–1905.] Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1934.Google Scholar

Wedgwood, Cicely Veronica. The Thirty-Years War [1938]. New York: New York Review Books, 2005.Google Scholar

Wegner, Sven-Ake. Eine kurze Einführung in Gottlob Freges Begriffsschrift. Wuppertal: Bergische Universität, 1979.Google Scholar

Wehmeier, Kai. “Aspekte der Frege–Hilbert-Korrespondenz,” History and Philosophy of Logic, 18 (1997): 201–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Weiner, Joan. Frege Explained: From Arithmetic to Analytic Philosophy. LaSalle: Open Court, 2004.Google Scholar

White, Roger. “Wittgenstein on Identity,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 78 (1977–1978): 157–74.Google Scholar

Whitehead, Alfred North, and Russell, Bertrand. Principia Mathematica. Three volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1910–1913 (first edition) and 1925 and 1927 (second edition).Google Scholar

Wilson, Mark. “Frege: The Royal Road from Geometry,” Noûs, 26(2) (1992): 149–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wilson, Peter Harnish. The Thirty Years War: Europe’s Tragedy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009.Google Scholar

Winterbourne, Anthony T. The Ideal and the Real: Kant’s Theory of Space, Time, and Mathematical Constructions. Bury St. Edmunds: Abramis Academic Publishing, 2007.Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Ed. Ogden, C. K.. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1922.Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Zettel. Trans. Anscombe, G. E. M.. Ed. Anscombe, G. E. M. and von Wright, G. H.. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1970.Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Letters to Russell, Keynes and Moore. Ed. von Wright, G. H.. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1974.Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics. Ed. von Wright, G. H., Rhees, R., and Anscombe, G. E. M.. Revised edition. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1978.Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Notebooks 1914–1916. Second edition. Ed. von Wright, G. H. and Anscombe, G. E. M., with an English translation by Anscombe, G. E. M.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations [1953]. Trans. Anscombe, G. E. M.. Third edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2001.Google Scholar

Wright, Crispin. Frege’s Conception of Numbers as Objects. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1983.Google Scholar

Zalta, Edward N. “Gottlob Frege.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Ed. Zalta, Edward N.. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2012.Google Scholar

Zamyatin, Yevgeny. We [1921]. Trans. Brown, Clarence. London: Penguin Books, 1993.Google Scholar

Zimmerman, Aaron. Moral Epistemology. Abingdon: Routledge, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar