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: Torkel Franzen argues
Replies: 25   Last Post: May 17, 2013 3:52 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 2,164
Registered: 10/4/10
Re: Torkel Franzen argues
Posted: May 4, 2013 12:07 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Nam Nguyen wrote:
> On 26/04/2013 11:09 AM, Nam Nguyen wrote:

> > On 2013-04-25, FredJeffries <fredjeffries@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Now PA has been proved consistent in ZF or NBG, but then that
> >> brings the consistency of axioms for set theory.

> Exactly right. And exactly my point.
> Somewhere, somehow, a circularity or an infinite regression
> of _mathematical knowledge_ will be reached,

How does one reach an infinite regression?

> and at that point
> we still have to confront with the issue of mathematical relativity.

It is not the case that either we go round in a circle or we regress

> There's really no escape to it, I'm afraid from what I could gather.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by
this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.
Jonathan Swift: Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting

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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum 1994-2015. All Rights Reserved.