Switch to: References

Citations of:

Semantics and the Ontology of Number

Cambridge University Press (2021)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Restricted nominalism about number and its problems.Stewart Shapiro, Richard Samuels & Eric Snyder - 2024 - Synthese 203 (5):1-23.
    Hofweber (Ontology and the ambitions of metaphysics, Oxford University Press, 2016) argues for a thesis he calls “internalism” with respect to natural number discourse: no expressions purporting to refer to natural numbers in fact refer, and no apparent quantification over natural numbers actually involves quantification over natural numbers as objects. He argues that while internalism leaves open the question of whether other kinds of abstracta exist, it precludes the existence of natural numbers, thus establishing what he calls “restricted nominalism” about (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Number Concepts: An Interdisciplinary Inquiry.Richard Samuels & Eric Snyder - 2024 - Cambridge University Press.
    This Element, written for researchers and students in philosophy and the behavioral sciences, reviews and critically assesses extant work on number concepts in developmental psychology and cognitive science. It has four main aims. First, it characterizes the core commitments of mainstream number cognition research, including the commitment to representationalism, the hypothesis that there exist certain number-specific cognitive systems, and the key milestones in the development of number cognition. Second, it provides a taxonomy of influential views within mainstream number cognition research, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Groups, sets, and paradox.Eric Snyder & Stewart Shapiro - 2022 - Linguistics and Philosophy 45 (6):1277-1313.
    Perhaps the most pressing challenge for singularism—the predominant view that definite plurals like ‘the students’ singularly refer to a collective entity, such as a mereological sum or set—is that it threatens paradox. Indeed, this serves as a primary motivation for pluralism—the opposing view that definite plurals refer to multiple individuals simultaneously through the primitive relation of plural reference. Groups represent one domain in which this threat is immediate. After all, groups resemble sets in having a kind of membership-relation and iterating: (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation