Frege, Hankel, and Formalism in the Foundations


  • Richard Lawrence



Frege says, at the end of a discussion of formalism in the Foundations of Arithmetic, that his own foundational program “could be called formal” but is “completely different” from the view he has just criticized. This essay examines Frege’s relationship to Hermann Hankel, his main formalist interlocutor in the Foundations, in order to make sense of these claims. The investigation reveals a surprising result: Frege’s foundational program actually has quite a lot in common with Hankel’s. This undercuts Frege’s claim that his own view is completely different from Hankel’s formalism, and motivates a closer examination of where the differences lie. On the interpretation offered here, Frege shares important parts of the formalist perspective, but differs in recognizing a kind of content for arithmetical terms which can only be made available via proof from prior postulates.


Blanchette, Patricia A., 2012. Frege’s Conception of Logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Crowe, Michael J., 1972. “Hankel, Hermann.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie, pp. 95–96. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Detlefsen, Michael, 2005. “Formalism.” In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic, edited by Stewart Shapiro, pp. 236–317. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ebert, Philip A. and Marcus Rossberg, eds., 2019. Essays on Frege’s Basic Laws of Arithmetic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Frege, Gottlob, 1882 [1997]. “Letter to Marty, 29 August 1882.” In Frege (1997), pp. 79–83.

———, 1884 [1953]. The Foundations of Arithmetic, Second revised edition. Oxford: Blackwell.

———, 1891 [1997]. “Letter to Husserl, 24 May 1891.” In Frege (1997), pp. 149–50.

———, 1997. The Frege Reader, edited by Michael Beaney. Oxford: Blackwell.

———, 2013. Basic Laws of Arithmetic, edited by Philip Ebert and Marcus Rossberg. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hankel, Hermann, 1867. Vorlesungen Über Die Complexen Zahlen Und Ihre Functionen. Leipzig: Leopold Voss.

Kant, Immanuel, 1781-87 [1998]. Critique of Pure Reason, edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mancosu, Paolo, 2015. “Grundlagen, Section 64: Frege” ’s Discussion of Definitions by Abstraction in Historical Context. History and Philosophy of Logic 36: 62–89.

———, 2016. Abstraction and Infinity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Merrick, Teri, 2020. Helmholtz, Cohen, and Frege on Progress and Fidelity: Sinning Against Science and Religion. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Petsche, Hans-Joachim, 2009. Hermann Graßmann: Biography. Basel: Birkhäuser.

Tappenden, Jamie, 1995. “Extending Knowledge and Fruitful Concepts: Fregean Themes in the Foundations of Mathematics.” Noûs 29: 427–67.

———, 1997. “Metatheory and Mathematical Practice in Frege.” Philosophical Topics 25: 213–64.

———, 2005. “The Caesar Problem in Its Historical Context: Mathematical Background.” Dialectica 59: 237–64.

———, 2008. “A Primer on Ernst Abbe for Frege Readers.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy Supplementary Volume 34: 31–118.

———, 2019. “Infinitesimals, Magnitudes, and Definition in Frege.” In Ebert and Rossberg (2019), pp. 235–63.

Thomae, Johannes, 1898. Elementare Theorie Der Analytischen Functionen Einer Complexen Veränderlichen, Second edition. Halle: Verlag von Louis Nebert.

Youschkevitch, A. P., 1976. “The Concept of Function up to the Middle of the 19th Century.” Archive for History of Exact Sciences 16: 37–85.