Can mathematics be formalized?
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
It has been accepted since the early part of the Century that there is no problem formalizing mathematics in standard formal systems of axiomatic set theory. Most people feel that they know as much as they ever want to know about how one can reduce natural numbers, integers, rationals, reals, and complex numbers to sets, and prove all of their basic properties. Furthermore, that this can continue through more and more complicated material, and that there is never a real problem.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
José Ferreirós (2011). On Arbitrary Sets and ZFC. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 17 (3):361-393.
Friedrich Waismann (1951). Introduction to Mathematical Thinking: The Formation of Concepts in Modern Mathematics. Dover Publications.
John Bigelow (1988). The Reality of Numbers: A Physicalist's Philosophy of Mathematics. Oxford University Press.
Christopher Pincock (2009). Towards a Philosophy of Applied Mathematics. In Otávio Bueno & Øystein Linnebo (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Mathematics. Palgrave Macmillan
B. H. Slater (2006). Grammar and Sets. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (1):59 – 73.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads117 ( #32,825 of 1,907,911 )
Recent downloads (6 months)20 ( #32,719 of 1,907,911 )
How can I increase my downloads?