Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

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


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

Topic: Matheology § 210
Replies: 3   Last Post: Feb 8, 2013 5:38 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de

Posts: 13,448
Registered: 1/29/05
Re: Matheology § 210
Posted: Feb 8, 2013 5:23 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On 8 Feb., 19:41, Alan Smaill <sma...@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

> You miss the point as ever --  you are suggesting that
> intuitionists were bullied into making a claim that Hilbert et al
> did *not* accept, viz:


They were forced to assert that subcountability in constructivism is
not in contradiction with uncountability in matheology. And that
cannot be expected from a healthy mind other than by torture or ban
from profession.

Regards, WM



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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.