Ipsa’s Reviews > On Sense and Reference > Status Update

the references of abstract noun clauses don't have any truth value but only a thought. for were the reference its truth value, then that truth value should potentially affect the truth value (the reference) of the whole sentence. Point in Case: 'Copernicus believed that the planetary orbits are circles’ and ‘Copernicus believed that the apparent motion of the sun is produced by the real motion of the Earth.’

Since grammarians classify subordinate clauses in accordance with parts of speech, like noun clauses, adjective clauses, and so on, we might then think that the reference of a subordinate clause is NOT a truth value like for full sentences but rather is more like the reference for nouns, adjectives, and so on, which in that case would be just a part of a thought.

I do not understand what Frege means when he says judgments are distinctions of parts within truth values. What are the parts and what are the distinctions? GODDAMNIT, I HATE LOGICIANS !!!!!!1!

The relation between thought and truth value isn't one of subject and predicate but of sense and reference. I think, I THINK, that is because that would involve us predicating the truth or falsity to the thought. And were this so, that means a new concept would be born from that predication. therefore, no new concept=no relation of predication. (?)