David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Studia Logica 50 (2):343 - 350 (1991)
It is well known that number theory can be interpreted in the usual set theories, e.g. ZF, NF and their extensions. The problem I posed for myself was to see if, conversely, a reasonably strong set theory could be interpreted in number theory. The reason I am interested in this problem is, simply, that number theory is more basic or more concrete than set theory, and hence a more concrete foundation for mathematics. A partial solution to the problem was accomplished by WTN in , where it was shown that a predicative set theory could be interpreted in a natural extension of pure number theory, PN, (i.e. classical first-order Peano Arithmetic). In this paper, we go a step further by showing that a reasonably strong fragment of predicative set theory can be interpreted in PN itself. We then make an attempt to show how to develop predicative fragments of mathematics in PN.If one wishes to know what is meant by reasonably strong and fragment please read on.
|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
Paul Strauss (1985). Number-Theoretic Set Theories. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 26 (1):81-95.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
P. T. Johnstone (1987). Notes on Logic and Set Theory. Cambridge University Press.
M. Randall Holmes (1995). The Equivalence of NF-Style Set Theories with "Tangled" Theories; the Construction of Ω-Models of Predicative NF (and More). Journal of Symbolic Logic 60 (1):178-190.
Joseph S. Ullian (1969). Is Any Set Theory True? Philosophy of Science 36 (3):271-279.
Fernando Ferreira (1999). A Note on Finiteness in the Predicative Foundations of Arithmetic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 28 (2):165-174.
John Mayberry (1994). What is Required of a Foundation for Mathematics? Philosophia Mathematica 2 (1):16-35.
F. A. Muller (2001). Sets, Classes, and Categories. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (3):539-573.
A. Weir (1998). Naïve Set Theory is Innocent! Mind 107 (428):763-798.
Ralf-Dieter Schindler (1993). Prädikative Klassen. Erkenntnis 39 (2):209 - 241.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads8 ( #167,561 of 1,098,129 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #283,807 of 1,098,129 )
How can I increase my downloads?