Journal of Philosophical Logic 5 (2):281 - 298 (1976)
|Abstract||The major point of contention among the philosophers and mathematicians who have written about the independence results for the continuum hypothesis (CH) and related questions in set theory has been the question of whether these results give reason to doubt that the independent statements have definite truth values. This paper concerns the views of G. Kreisel, who gives arguments based on second order logic that the CH does have a truth value. The view defended here is that although Kreisel's conclusion is correct, his arguments are unsatisfactory. Later sections of the paper advance a different argument that the independence results do not show lack of truth values|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Hartley Slater (2003). Aggregate Theory Versus Set Theory. Erkenntnis 59 (2):189 - 202.
Jouko Väänänen (2012). Second Order Logic or Set Theory? Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 18 (1):91-121.
Harvey Friedman (2003). Primitive Independence Results. Journal of Mathematical Logic 3 (01):67-83.
Thomas S. Weston (1977). The Continuum Hypothesis is Independent of Second-Order ZF. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 18 (3):499-503.
Gregory H. Moore (2011). Early History of the Generalized Continuum Hypothesis: 1878—1938. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 17 (4):489-532.
Paul J. Cohen (1966). Set Theory and the Continuum Hypothesis. New York, W. A. Benjamin.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads35 ( #39,252 of 722,932 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,863 of 722,932 )
How can I increase my downloads?