The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Matheology § 210
Replies: 24   Last Post: Feb 12, 2013 1:12 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Alan Smaill

Posts: 1,103
Registered: 1/29/05
Re: Matheology § 210
Posted: Feb 8, 2013 6:13 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

WM <> writes:

> On 7 Feb., 20:17, William Hughes <> wrote:
>> In classical set theory the accessible numbers are listable
>> Note from the Wikipedia quote

>> > Constructively it is consistent to assert the
>> > subcountability of some uncountable collections

> Of course, the intuitionists accepted this nonsense, perhaps forced by
> the matheologians.

What a joker!

You tell us that you do not know Brouwer's opinion on this question,
but here you are telling us what intuitionists accept.

WM is inconsistent.

As for intuitionists being "forced" into taking up a
position inconsistent with classical mathematics by classical
mathematicians ...
a classic absurdity.

> Regards, WM

Alan Smaill

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.