David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
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
Constantine Politis (1965). Limitations of Formalization. Philosophy of Science 32 (3/4):356-360.
John Bigelow (1988). The Reality of Numbers: A Physicalist's Philosophy of Mathematics. Oxford University Press.
Harvey Friedman (2000). Does Mathematics Need New Axioms? Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 6 (4):401 - 446.
Christopher Pincock (2009). Towards a Philosophy of Applied Mathematics. In Otávio Bueno & Øystein Linnebo (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Mathematics. Palgrave Macmillan.
Friedrich Waismann (1951/2003). Introduction to Mathematical Thinking: The Formation of Concepts in Modern Mathematics. Dover Publications.
José Ferreirós (2011). On Arbitrary Sets and ZFC. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 17 (3):361-393.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #135,213 of 1,101,906 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #306,556 of 1,101,906 )
How can I increase my downloads?