A Framework for Formalizing Set Theories Based on the Use of Static Set Terms
| Abstract | We present a new unified framework for formalizations of axiomatic set theories of different strength, from rudimentary set theory to full ZF . It allows the use of set terms, but provides a static check of their validity. Like the inconsistent “ideal calculus” for set theory, it is essentially based on just two set-theoretical principles: extensionality and comprehension (to which we add ∈-induction and optionally the axiom of choice). Comprehension is formulated as: x ∈ {x | ϕ} ↔ ϕ, where {x | ϕ} is a legal set term of the theory. In order for {x | ϕ} to be legal, ϕ should be safe with respect to {x}, where safety is a relation between.. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,875 |
| External links | This entry has no external links. Add one. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesF. A. Muller (2001). Sets, Classes, and Categories. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (3):539-573.
Steve Awodey (2008). A Brief Introduction to Algebraic Set Theory. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 14 (3):281-298.
Johannes Heidema (1990). An Axiom Schema of Comprehension of Zermelo–Fraenkel–Skolem Set Theory. History and Philosophy of Logic 11 (1):59-65.
Andrzej Kisielewicz (1998). A Very Strong Set Theory? Studia Logica 61 (2):171-178.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads5 ( #162,017 of 556,896 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,931 of 556,896 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
