Abstract
In §12 of his 1837 magnum opus, the Wissenschaftslehre, Bolzano remarks that “In the new logic textbooks one reads almost constantly that ‘in logic one must consider not the material of thought but the mere form of thought, for which reason logic deserves the title of a purely formal science’” (WL §12, 46).1 The sentence Bolzano quotes is his own summary of others’ philosophical views; he goes on to cite Jakob, Hoffbauer, Metz, and Krug as examples of thinkers who held that logic abstracts from the matter of thought and considers only its form. Although Bolzano does not mention Kant by name here, Kant does of course hold that “pure general logic”, what Bolzano would consider logic in the traditional sense (the theory of propositions, representations, inferences, etc.), is formal. As Kant remarks in the Introduction to the 2nd edition of Kritik der reinen Vernunft , (pure general) logic is “justified in abstracting – is indeed obliged to abstract – from all objects of cognition and all of their differences; and in logic, therefore, the understanding has to do with nothing further than itself and its own form” (KrV, Bix).2
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Works of Kant cited
Kant, I. (1905). Kants gesammelte Schriften. Edited by the Berlin-Brandenburg (formerly Royal Prussian) Academy of Sciences. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Kant, I. (1992). Lectures on Logic. Translated and edited by J. Michael Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I. (1997). Critique of Pure Reason. Translated and edited by P. Guyer and A. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Works of Bolzano cited
Bolzano, B. (1837). Wissenschaftslehre. 4 vols. Sulzbach. Republished by Wolgang Schultz, Leipzig, 1929–1931.
Příhonský, F. (1850). Neuer Anti-Kant. Bautzen: A. Weller. Republ. (2003). Edited by E. Morscher. St Augustin: Academia.
Secondary literature
Lapointe, S. (2011). Bolzano’s Theoretical Philosophy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lapointe, S. (2012). ‘Is Logic Formal? Bolzano, Kant and the Kantian Logicians’, Grazer Philosophische Studien, 85, 11–32.
Longuenesse, Béatrice. (1998). Kant and the Capacity to Judge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
MacFarlane, J. (2002). ‘Frege, Kant, and the Logic in Logicism’, The Philosophical Review, 111, 25–65.
Rusnock, P. (2011). ‘Kant and Bolzano on Logical Form’, Kant- Studien, 102, 477–491.
Rusnock, P. and Burke, M. (2010). ‘Etchemendy and Bolzano on Logical Consequence’, History and Philosophy of Logic, 31.1, 3–29.
Siebel, M. (1996). Der Begriff der Ableitbarkeit bei Bolzano. St Augustin: Academia.
Siebel, M. (2002). ‘Bolzano’s Concept of Consequence’, The Monist, 85.4, 580–599.
Stang, N. (2012). ‘Kant on Complete Determination and Infinite Judgment’, British Journal of the History of Philosophy, 20.6, 1117–1139.
Tarski, A. (1936). ‘The Concept of Logical Consequence’, Republished in (1956). Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics: Papers from 1923 to 1938. Translated by J.H. Woodger. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tolley, C. (2012). ‘Bolzano and Kant on the Nature of Logic’, History and Philosophy of Logic, 33, 307–327.
Van Cleve, J. (1999). Problems from Kant. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Woods, J. (forthcoming). ‘Logical indefinites’, Logique et Analyse.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Nicholas F. Stang
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stang, N.F. (2014). Kant, Bolzano, and the Formality of Logic. In: Lapointe, S., Tolley, C. (eds) New Anti-Kant. History of Analytic Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137312655_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137312655_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-33189-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-31265-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)