green numbers give full details | back to texts | unexpand this idea
| 9159 | You can't simply convert geometry into algebra, as some spatial content is lost |
| Full Idea: Although one can translate geometrical propositions into algebraic ones and produce equivalent models, the meaning of geometrical propositions seems to me to be thereby lost. Pure geometry involves spatial content, even if abstracted from physical space. | |||
| From: Tyler Burge (Frege on Apriority [2000], IV) | |||
| A reaction: This supports Frege's view (against Quine) that geometry won't easily fit into the programme of logicism. I agree with Burge. You would be focusing on the syntax of geometry, and leaving out the semantics. |