The Axioms of Set Theory
Axiomathes 13 (2):107-126 (2002)
| Abstract | In this paper I argue for the view that the axioms of ZF are analytic truths of a particular concept of set. By this I mean that these axioms are true by virtue only of the meaning attached to this concept, and, moreover, can be derived from it. Although I assume that the object of ZF is a concept of set, I refrain from asserting either its independent existence, or its dependence on subjectivity. All I presuppose is that this concept is given to us with a certain sense as the objective focus of a phenomenologically reduced intentional experience. The concept of set that ZF describes, I claim, is that of a multiplicity of coexisting elements that can, as a consequence, be a member of another multiplicity. A set is conceived as a quantitatively determined collection of objects that is, by necessity, ontologically dependent on its elements, which, on the other hand, must exist independently of it. A close scrutiny of the essential characters of this conception seems to be sufficient to ground the set-theoretic hierarchy and the axioms of ZF | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,664 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJairo José Da Silva (2002). The Axioms of Set Theory. Axiomathes 13 (2):107-126.
John P. Burgess (2004). E Pluribus Unum: Plural Logic and Set Theory. Philosophia Mathematica 12 (3):193-221.
Eric W. Holman (1974). Extensive Measurement Without an Order Relation. Philosophy of Science 41 (4):361-373.
Alexander Paseau (2007). Boolos on the Justification of Set Theory. Philosophia Mathematica 15 (1):30-53.
Penelope Maddy (2011). Defending the Axioms: On the Philosophical Foundations of Set Theory. Oxford University Press.
Johannes Heidema (1990). An Axiom Schema of Comprehension of Zermelo–Fraenkel–Skolem Set Theory. History and Philosophy of Logic 11 (1):59-65.
F. A. Muller (2004). The Implicit Definition of the Set-Concept. Synthese 138 (3):417 - 451.
Rodrigo A. Freire (2012). On Existence in Set Theory. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 53 (4):525-547.
Floy Andrews Doull (1991). Leibniz's Logical System of 1686-1690. Theoria 6 (1):9-28.
F. A. Muller (2004). The Implicit Definition of the Set-Concept. Synthese 138 (3):417 - 451.
Luca Incurvati (2008). On Adopting Kripke Semantics in Set Theory. Review of Symbolic Logic 1 (1):81-96.
Øystein Linnebo (2012). Review of P. Maddy, Defending the Axioms: On the Philosophical Foundations of Set Theory. [REVIEW] Philosophy 87 (01):133-137.
Tatiana Arrigoni (2011). V = L and Intuitive Plausibility in Set Theory. A Case Study. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 17 (3):337-360.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-08-31Total downloads6 ( #145,498 of 549,013 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,261 of 549,013 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
