Book Review:Naive Set Theory Paul R. Halmos
Philosophy of Science 28 (4):445- (1961)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| 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: 5,679 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesKarel Lambert (2000). Set Theory and Definite Descriptions. Grazer Philosophische Studien 60:1-11.
A. Weir (1998). Naïve Set Theory is Innocent! Mind 107 (428):763-798.
Omar Khayyam Moore (1959). Book Review:Toward a Measure of Man: The Frontiers of Normal Adjustment. Paul Halmos. [REVIEW] Ethics 70 (1):79-.
Zach Weber (2010). Extensionality and Restriction in Naive Set Theory. Studia Logica 94 (1).
Harty Field (2004). The Consistency of the Naïve Theory of Properties. Philosophical Quarterly 54 (214):78 - 104.
Loïc Colson (2007). Another Paradox in Naive Set-Theory. Studia Logica 85 (1):33 - 39.
Kazushige Terui (2004). Light Affine Set Theory: A Naive Set Theory of Polynomial Time. Studia Logica 77 (1):9 - 40.
Ross T. Brady (forthcoming). The Simple Consistency of Naive Set Theory Using Metavaluations. Journal of Philosophical Logic:1-21.
Michael Glanzberg (2003). Minimalism and Paradoxes. Synthese 135 (1):13 - 36.
Andrea Cantini (2003). The Undecidability of Grisin's Set Theory. Studia Logica 74 (3):345 - 368.
Paul Halmos (1966). Psychologies of Love. Philosophy 41 (155):58-.
Richard Kaye (1993). Book Review: T. E. Forster. Set Theory with a Universal Set: Exploring an Untyped Universe. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 34 (2):302-309.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-08-24Total downloads2 ( #232,501 of 549,087 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,087 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
