Gisela Bengtsson

The debate surrounding Open Access publishing moved into a new and heated stage after the launching of the so called ”plan S” earlier this autumn.The plan is an initiative of cOAlition S, a consortium consisting of major national research agencies and funders from twelve European countries, coordinated bytheEuropean Research Council,and it requires that all scholarly publications resulting from research funded by members of the coalition must be openly available immediately upon publication without any embargo period, and be permanently accessible under an open license allowing for re-use for any purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship. This means that the CC BY Attribution 4.0 license will be demanded for scholarly articles.

This volume collects nine essays that investigate the work of Gottlob Frege. The contributors address Frege’s work in relation to literature and fiction (Dichtung), the humanities (Geisteswissenschaften), and science (Wissenschaft). Overall, the essays consider internal connections between different aspects of Frege’s work while acknowledging the importance of its philosophical context. There are also further common strands between the papers, such as the relation between Frege’s and Wittgenstein’s approaches to philosophical investigations, the relation between Frege and Kant, and the place of Frege’s work in the philosophical landscape more generally. The volume is therefore of direct relevance to several current debates in philosophy in general, in addition to Frege and Wittgenstein research in particular. Even though Frege’s great significance for contemporary philosophy is not disputed, the question of how we are to understand the character and aims of his project is debated. The debate has a starting point in Frege’s specific conception of logic. The volume elucidates this conception as well as the relation between natural language and the Begriffsschrift. It will help philosophers, researchers, and students better understand the nuances of this great thinker. By extension, it will also help readers seeking to understand Wittgenstein’s approach to philosophical difficulties and his struggle to find an apt form of presentation for his philosophical investigations.

The debate surrounding Open Access publishing moved into a new and heated stage after the launching of the so called ”plan S” earlier this autumn.The plan is an initiative of cOAlition S, a consortium consisting of major national research agencies and funders from twelve European countries, coordinated bytheEuropean Research Council,and it requires that all scholarly publications resulting from research funded by members of the coalition must be openly available immediately upon publication without any embargo period, and be permanently accessible under an open license allowing for re-use for any purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship. This means that the CC BY Attribution 4.0 license will be demanded for scholarly articles.

Drawing has been seen as the most intellectual in character among the forms of art, and croquis drawing has been taught within an academic and scientific framework, as theoretical knowledge about the human body was considered nec-essary to become a master of depiction. Knowledge of this kind may nevertheless become a hindrance when trying to capture the appearance of a model in a drawing: to be able to rely on eye and hand, suppressing knowledge may be required. I discuss this paradox with regard to croquis drawing and the conception of seeingin Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations.

“Simple, forceful, strict” are the words Georg Henrik von Wright uses to describe Gottlob Frege’s style of writing. He adds that it often contains an element of ice-cold irony, and this description seems to capture well the style that had such a great impact on Ludwig Wittgenstein’s sentences. In a later essay, von Wright borrows a distinction between two different human intellectual approaches from Friedrich Waismann, and gives it a central role in an outline of the origin and development of analytic philosophy. The distinction is between a scientific approach that has the search for knowledge and true propositions as a primary guideline, and a philosophical approach that views clarity as the ultimate goal. Those guided by a philosophical approach seek to make clear what propositions mean. Characteristic of this approach is the conception that philosophy is distinct from science, as it neither is directed at the construction of theories, nor guided by a search for knowledge in the form of true proposition. The scientific approach, on the other hand, is characterized by a unified view of science according to which philosophy forms a part of it. Interaction and conflict between these two approaches characterize the development of analytic philosophy, according to the picture von Wright presents. Without hesitation, von Wright lets Bertrand Russell represent the first approach and G. E. Moore the second. Frege is spoken of much more cautiously. It is as if von Wright does not quite know what to say or where to place Frege with regard to the distinction between the two different intellectual approaches.

In this paper, I identify an assumption at play in anti-semantic interpretative approaches to Frege: the notion that translatability to Frege’s concept script functions as a criterion for deciding whether a thought is expressed in a sentence or utterance. I question the viability of this assumption by pointing to Frege’s accounts of the aim and character of his logical language and scientific discourse more generally, and by looking at his remarks on poetic forms of language, literature and fiction (Dichtung). Since it seems clear that the sentences used in poetic and literary forms of language that Frege discusses, have Sinn and are possible to understand, in his view, I argue that the translatability criterion for thoughts is flawed. A discussion of Frege’s appeal to an approach of willingness to understand in a reader, and the relation between Frege’s use of elucidatory discourse and his conception of Dichtung is central to my exposition in this paper.

The debate surrounding Open Access publishing moved into a new and heated stage after the launching of the so called ”plan S” earlier this autumn.The plan is an initiative of cOAlition S, a consortium consisting of major national research agencies and funders from twelve European countries, coordinated bytheEuropean Research Council,and it requires that all scholarly publications resulting from research funded by members of the coalition must be openly available immediately upon publication without any embargo period, and be permanently accessible under an open license allowing for re-use for any purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship. This means that the CC BY Attribution 4.0 license will be demanded for scholarly articles.