Abstract
Neo-Fregeans need their stipulation of Hume's Principle - NxFx=NxGx iff the Fs and the Gs are equinumerous - to do two things. First it must implicitly define the term-forming operator 'Nx...x...', and second it must guarantee that Hume's Principle as a whole is true. I distinguish two senses in which the neo-Fregeans might 'stipulate' Hume's Principle, and argue that while one sort of stipulation fixes a meaning for 'Nx...x...' and the other guarantees the truth of Hume's Principle, neither does both.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 361-379 |
| Number of pages | 19 |
| Journal | Philosophia Mathematica |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 31 May 2014 |
