Annals of Science 34 (2):177-191 (1977)
AbstractGiven the old conception of the relation greater than, the proposition that the whole is greater than the part is an immediate consequence. But being greater in this sense is not incompatible with being equal in the sense of one-one correspondence. Some who failed to recognize this formulated invalid arguments against the possibility of infinite quantities. Others who did realize that the relations of equal and greater when so defined are compatible, concluded that such relations are not appropriately taken as quantitative relations, at least, not in general. If suitable quantitative relations were to be defined, there was a possibility of retaining either the traditional definition of greater and finding another concept of equality, or of retaining the concept of equality as one-one correspondence and defining greater than so that it is incompatible with equality in this sense. The former alternative was implicitly taken by Bolzano, who never succeeded in defining suitable quantitative relations. The latter alternative was taken by Cantor, and is the basis of his great success in constructing a mathematical theory of the transfinite
Similar books and articles
A New Applied Approach for Executing Computations with Infinite and Infinitesimal Quantities.Yaroslav D. Sergeyev - 2008 - Informatica 19 (4):567-596.
On Quasi-Amorphous Sets.P. Creed & J. K. Truss - 2001 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 40 (8):581-596.
The Theistic Argument From Infinity in Early Modern Philosophy.Philip Clayton - 1996 - International Philosophical Quarterly 36 (1):5-17.
Some Ramsey-Type Theorems for Countably Determined Sets.Josef Mlček & Pavol Zlatoš - 2002 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 41 (7):619-630.
The Finite and the Infinite in Frege's Grundgesetze der Arithmetik.Richard Heck - 1998 - In Matthias Schirn (ed.), Philosophy of Mathematics Today. Oxford University Press.
Powers of 2.Kyriakos Keremedis & Horst Herrlich - 1999 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 40 (3):346-351.
Infinite Time Decidable Equivalence Relation Theory.Samuel Coskey & Joel David Hamkins - 2011 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 52 (2):203-228.
Ultrafilters and Non-Cantor Minimal Sets in Linearly Ordered Dynamical Systems.M. Hrušák, M. Sanchis & Á Tamariz-Mascarúa - 2008 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 47 (3):193-203.
Parameterized Partition Relations on the Real Numbers.Joan Bagaria & Carlos A. Di Prisco - 2009 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 48 (2):201-226.
Blinking Fractals and Their Quantitative Analysis Using Infinite and Infinitesimal Numbers.Yaroslav Sergeyev - 2007 - Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 33 (1):50-75.
Numbers as Quantitative Relations and the Traditional Theory of Measurement.Joel Michell - 1994 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45 (2):389-406.
On the Reducibility of Relations: Variations on a Theme of Peirce.Ernst Kleinert - 2007 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 43 (3):509 - 520.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Measuring the Size of Infinite Collections of Natural Numbers: Was Cantor’s Theory of Infinite Number Inevitable?: Measuring the Size of Infinite Collections of Natural Numbers.Paolo Mancosu - 2009 - Review of Symbolic Logic 2 (4):612-646.
Lakatos and the Philosophy of Mathematics and Science: On Popper's Philosophy and its Prospects.I. Grattan-Guinness - 1979 - British Journal for the History of Science 12 (3):317-337.
References found in this work
Theory of Science: A Selection, with an Introduction.Bernard Bolzano - 1973 - Boston: D. Reidel Pub. Co..
Leibniz' Conception of Quantity, Number, and Infinity.Nicholas Rescher - 1955 - Philosophical Review 64 (1):108-114.