The argument from understanding presupposes a learnable, correctable practice, but Fregean concepts are abstract objects that one either grasps or fails to grasp without any intermediate notion of partial understanding.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Fregean concepts(as used in philosophy of language and logic): Ideas about meaning and reference developed by philosopher Gottlob Frege; in this context, abstract mental objects that you either fully understand or don't understand at all, with no in-between state.
Partial understanding(as used in epistemology (the study of knowledge)): Grasping some but not all of what someone means; getting the general idea even if you miss some nuances or deeper layers.
Presupposes(as describing what Plantinga's argument takes for granted): Assumes something to be true without proving it—like how an argument might presuppose that logic works, without first arguing that logic is valid.
The argument from understanding(as used in epistemology): A philosophical debate about how we learn and understand concepts, typically arguing that learning requires stepping stones of partial understanding rather than all-or-nothing grasping.

Based on where you are in your exploration