Logicists

Frege and other logicists first claim that any theorem of pure logic is true. ❋ Linnebo, Øystein (2009)

This overlap is due not only to commonality of interest, but to direct influence of philosophical logic on logical AI; there is ample evidence, as we will see, that the first generation at least of AI logicists read and were influenced by the literature in philosophical logic. ❋ Thomason, Richmond (2008)

This goal is remarkably similar to those of the common sense logicists, but the research methodology is entirely different. ❋ Thomason, Richmond (2008)

Similarly, an important discovery of the “natural language logicists” has been the importance of different kinds of events ❋ Thomason, Richmond (2008)

It has been suggested that PFO be used to accommodate the post-Fregean logicists 'need for second-order quantification. ❋ Linnebo, Øystein (2008)

Since these logicists attempt to show that parts of mathematics are analytic (or at least knowable a priori), this would require that PFO be analytic (or at least knowable a priori), which in turn is likely to require that PFO enjoy some form of cognitive primacy. ❋ Linnebo, Øystein (2008)

Even more modest is Boolos's sub-logicism, which rejects the idea (endorsed by both logicists and neo-logicists) that there are logical objects, but insists that Frege's definition of the ancestral of a relation can be used to show, as against Kant, that at least some non-trivial mathematics is analytic (Boolos 1985b). ❋ Linnebo, Øystein (2008)

Many theologians have over the centuries tried to explain this phenomenon, materialists, positive logicists and fantacians. ❋ Unknown (2007)

Although for many AI logicists, the goal of action formalisms is to illuminate an important aspect of common sense reasoning, most of their research is uninformed by an important source of insights into the common sense view of time ” namely, natural language. ❋ Thomason, Richmond (2008)