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 § 288
Replies: 15   Last Post: Jun 22, 2013 12:23 AM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 1,968
Registered: 12/4/12
Re: Matheology § 288
Posted: Jun 22, 2013 12:15 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On 6/21/2013 10:00 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> "fom" <fomJUNK@nyms.net> wrote in message
> news:X5CdnU5BCcfKQlnMnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d@giganews.com...
>

>> Logic involves priority, and Nelson's statement
>> is debatable on these grounds.

>
> Priority is in question here, and, in this sense, I'd concur with
> Nelson's criticism: the "classical conception" does not provide
> satisfactory answers.
>


Which classical conception?

Nelson appears to be speaking of the Dedekind-Peano
axioms under a formalist interpretation.

Hilbert's formalism reversed the sense of the
class-based constructions of Cantor and Frege.

Hilbert's formalism does this by taking identity
for granted and assuming a domain of delimited
objects.

Neither Cantor nor Frege takes identity for granted
in their work.

So, with whom is Nelson disagreeing and what answers
are unsatisfactory?






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.