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

Topic: how does Indirect NonExistence compare with Constructivism school of
math? #197; 2nd ed; Correcting Math

Replies: 49   Last Post: Oct 22, 2009 2:43 AM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 1,745
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math

Posted: Oct 16, 2009 12:49 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Oct 12, 8:07 am, Marshall <marshall.spi...@gmail.com> wrote:
|I guess what I'm fixating on is what kind of values the
|logic is manipulating.

It depends on what you mean.

Propositional or predicate calculus is always manipulating
propositions or predicates, whether you are thinking of it
as classical or intuitionistic. You get away with supposing
in the classical case that "ultimately" the propositions
all have "truth value" either "true" or "false" because
you have assumed (pretty much by fiat) that they do, but
it's not clear what the really gets you. Constructivists
sometimes think differently about what propositions are,
but it's somewhat difficult to convey. The kind of
verificationist philosophy described in Dummett's Elements
of Intuitionism might give you an idea.

For some purposes you can think of classical logic as
having "values" in Boolean algebras and intuitionistic
logic as having "values" in Heyting algebras. (That's
essentially just a restatement of certain logical laws
in algebraic form, though.)

Kripke models provide a way to think about intuitionistic
logic. Instead of thinking about what is true now, think
about what might or might not be discovered at future
stages in the game. Then without taking off your classical
thinking cap you can get a prosaic way of thinking about
intuitionistic logic.

Keith Ramsay


Date Subject Author
10/10/09
Read how does Indirect NonExistence compare with Constructivism school of
math? #197; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/10/09
Read Re: how does Indirect NonExistence compare with Constructivism school
of math? #198; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/10/09
Read Indirect NonExistence elevates the Constructivist School as the
highest #199; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/11/09
Read Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/11/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/11/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Aatu Koskensilta
10/11/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Jan Burse
10/11/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Jan Burse
10/11/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/12/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Keith Ramsay
10/12/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/12/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/12/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/13/09
Read six counterexamples to the Goldbach Conjecture and one for FLT #207;
2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/13/09
Read Re: six counterexamples to the Goldbach Conjecture and one for FLT
#207; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
anonymous.rubbertube@yahoo.com
10/13/09
Read Re: six counterexamples to the Goldbach Conjecture and one for FLT
#210; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/14/09
Read Re: six counterexamples to the Goldbach Conjecture and one for FLT
#211; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/14/09
Read Re: six counterexamples to the Goldbach Conjecture and one for FLT
#212; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/14/09
Read comments on the viability of Goldbach Conjecture #213; 2nd ed;
Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/14/09
Read easiest counterexamples to FLT #214; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/15/09
Read largest single problem in math today-- Finite #216; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/12/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/16/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Keith Ramsay
10/16/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Keith Ramsay
10/16/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Brian Q. Hutchings
10/17/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Aatu Koskensilta
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/19/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/19/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/19/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/21/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/21/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/19/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Aatu Koskensilta
10/22/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/21/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Trop
10/17/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/18/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism
is mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
namducnguyen
10/16/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #200; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Marshall
10/11/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #201; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/11/09
Read Re: Whitehead & Russell on Reductio A.A. and when Constructivism is
mainstream #202; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
10/14/09
Read Re: how does Indirect NonExistence compare with Constructivism school
of math? #197; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
Trop

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.