Linked bibliography for the SEP article "Skolem’s Paradox" by Timothy Bays

This is an automatically generated and experimental page

If everything goes well, this page should display the bibliography of the aforementioned article as it appears in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, but with links added to PhilPapers records and Google Scholar for your convenience. Some bibliographies are not going to be represented correctly or fully up to date. In general, bibliographies of recent works are going to be much better linked than bibliographies of primary literature and older works. Entries with PhilPapers records have links on their titles. A green link indicates that the item is available online at least partially.

This experiment has been authorized by the editors of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The original article and bibliography can be found here.

Anderson, D., 1993, “What is the Model-Theoretic Argument,” The Journal of Philosophy, 93: 311–22. (Scholar)
Badesa, C., 2004, The Birth of Model Theory, Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Scholar)
Bays, T., 2001, “On Putnam and his Models,” The Journal of Philosophy, 98: 331–50. (Scholar)
–––, 2007a, “The Mathematics of Skolem's Paradox,” in Jacquette 2007, pp. 615-648. (Scholar)
–––, 2007b, “More on Putnam's Models: A Response to Bellotti,” Erkenntnis, 67: 119–135. (Scholar)
–––, 2008, “Two Arguments against Realism,” The Philosophical Quarterly, 58: 193–213. (Scholar)
Bellotti, L., 2005, “Putnam and Constructibility,” Erkenntnis, 62: 395–409. (Scholar)
–––, 2006, “Skolem, the Skolem ‘Paradox’ and Informal Mathematics,” Theoria, 72: 177–220. (Scholar)
Benacerraf, P., 1965, “What the Numbers Could Not Be,” in Philosophy of Mathematics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983, pp. 272-294. (Scholar)
–––, 1985, “Skolem and the Skeptic,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 59: 85–115. (Scholar)
Button, T., 2011, “The Metamathematics of Putnam's Model-Theoretic Arguments,” Erkenntnis, 74: 321–349. (Scholar)
Chambers, T., 2000, “A Quick Reply to Putnam's Paradox,” Mind, 109: 195–197. (Scholar)
Devitt, M., 1984, Realism & Truth, Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Scholar)
Douven, I., 1999, “Putnam's Model-Theoretic Argument Reconstructed,” The Journal of Philosophy, 96: 479–90. (Scholar)
Ebbinghaus, H. D., Flum, J., and Thomas, W., 1994, Mathematical Logic, Amsterdam: Springer. (Scholar)
Ebbinghaus, H. D., 2003, “Zermelo: Definiteness and the Universe of Definable Sets,” History and Philosophy of Logic, 24: 197–219. (Scholar)
–––, 2007, “Löwenheim-Skolem Theorems,” in Jacquette 2007, pp. 587–614. (Scholar)
Fine, A., 1968, “Quantification over the Real Numbers,” Philosophical Studies, 19: 27–31. (Scholar)
Fraenkel, A., Bar-Hillel, Y., and Levy, A., 1984, Foundations of Set Theory, Amsterdam: North-Holland. (Scholar)
Gaifman, H., 2004, “Non-Standard Models in a Broader Perspective,” in Non-Standard Models of Arithmetic and Set Theory, A. Enayat and R. Kossak, (eds.), New York: American Mathematical Society, pp. 1–22. (Scholar)
Garcia-Carpintero, M., 1996, “The Model-Theoretic Argument: Another Turn of the Screw,” Erkenntnis, 44: 305–316. (Scholar)
George, A., 1985, “Skolem and the Löwenheim-Skolem Theorems,” History and Philosophy of Logic, 6: 75–89. (Scholar)
Giaquinto, M., 2002, The Search for Certainty, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
Goodstein, R. L., 1963, “The Significance of Incompleteness Theorems,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 14: 208–220. (Scholar)
Hacking, I., 1983, Representing and Intervening, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
Hafner, J., 2005, From Metamathematics to Philosophy: A Critical Assessment of Putnam's Model-Theoretic Argument, Ph.D. Thesis, UC Berkeley. (Scholar)
Hamkins, J. D., 2011, “The Set-Theoretic Multiverse: A Natural Context for Set Theory,” Annals of the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science, 19: 37–55. (Scholar)
–––, 2012, “The Set-Theoretic Multiverse,” Review of Symbolic Logic, 5: 416–449. (Scholar)
Hale, B. and Wright, C., 1997, “Putnam's Model Theoretic Argument against Metaphysical Realism,” in A Companion to the Philosophy of Language, B. Hale and C. Wright, (eds.), Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 427–457. (Scholar)
Hallett, M., 1994, “Putnam and the Skolem Paradox,” in Reading Putnam, P. Clark and B. Hale, (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 66–97. (Scholar)
Hart, W., 1970, “Skolem's Promises and Paradoxes,” The Journal of Philosophy, 67: 98–109. (Scholar)
Haukioja, J., 2001, “Not So Quick: A Reply to Chambers,” Mind, 110: 699–702. (Scholar)
Jacquette, D., (ed.), 2007, Philosophy of Logic, London: Elsevier. (Scholar)
Jané, I., 2001, “Reflections on Skolem's Relativity of Set-Theoretical Concepts,” Philosophia Mathematica, 3: 129–153. (Scholar)
Jech, T., 1978, Set Theory, San Diego: Academic Press. (Scholar)
Kleene, S., 1967, Mathematical Logic, New York: John Wiley & Sons. (Scholar)
Klenk, V., 1976, “Intended Models and the Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem,” The Journal of Philosophical Logic, 5: 475–489. (Scholar)
Kneale, W. and Kneale, M., 1962, The Development of Logic, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Scholar)
Kroon, F., 2001, “Chambers on Putnam's Paradox,” Mind, 110: 703–708. (Scholar)
Kunnen, K., 1980, Set Theory, Amsterdam: North-Holland. (Scholar)
Levin, M., 1997, “Putnam on Reference and Constructible sets,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 48: 55–67. (Scholar)
Lewis, D., 1984, “Putnam's Paradox,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 62: 221–236. (Scholar)
Lindström, P., 1966, “First-order Predicate Logic with Generalized Quantifiers,” Theoria, 32: 186–195. (Scholar)
–––, 1969, “On Extensions of Elementary Logic,” Theoria, 35: 1–11. (Scholar)
Löwenheim, L., 1915, “On Possibilities in the Calculus of Relatives,” in van Heijenoort 1967, pp. 228–251. (Scholar)
McIntosh, C., 1979, “Skolem's Criticisms of Set Theory,” Nous, 13: 313–334. (Scholar)
Muller, F., 2005, “Deflating Skolem,” Synthese, 143: 223–253. (Scholar)
Myhill, J., 1967, “On the Ontological Significance of the Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem,” in Contemporary Readings in Logical Theory, I. Copi and J. Gould, (eds.), New York: Macmillan, pp. 40–51. (Scholar)
Putnam, H., 1980, “Models and Reality,” in Putnam 1983, pp. 1–25. (Scholar)
–––, 1983, Realism and Reason, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
–––, 1989, “Model Theory and the ‘factuality’ of Semantics,” in Reflections on Chomsky, A. George, (ed.), Cambridge: Blackwell, pp. 213–231. (Scholar)
Resnik, M., 1966, “On Skolem's Paradox,” The Journal of Philosophy, 63: 425–438. (Scholar)
–––, 1969, “More on Skolem's Paradox,” Noûs, 3: 185–196. (Scholar)
Shapiro, S., 1991, Foundations without Foundationalism, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
Shoenfield, J., 67, Mathematical Logic, Natick, MA.: Association for Symbolic Logic.
Skolem, T., 1922, “Some Remarks on Axiomitized Set Theory,” in van Heijenoort 1967, pp. 290–301. (Scholar)
–––, 1955, “A Critical Remark on Foundational Research,” in Skolem 1970, pp. 581–586. (Scholar)
–––, 1958, “Une Relativisation des Notions Mathematiques Fondementales,” in Skolem 1970, pp. 587–600. (Scholar)
–––, 1970, Selected Works in Logic, Oslo: Uiversitetsforlaget. (Scholar)
Taylor, B., 1991, “ ‘Just More Theory’: A Manoeuvre in Putnam's Model-Theoretic Argument for Antirealism,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 69: 152–166.
Taylor, G., 1993, “Zermelo, Reductionism, and the Philosophy of Mathematics,” Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 34: 539–563. (Scholar)
Tennant, N. and McCarty, C., 1987, “Skolem's Paradox and Constructivism,” The Journal of Philosophical Logic, 16: 165–202. (Scholar)
Thomas, W., 1968, “Platonism and the Skolem Paradox,” Analysis, 28: 193–196. (Scholar)
–––, 1971, “On Behalf of the Skolemite,” Analysis, 31: 177–186. (Scholar)
Van Cleve, J. 1992, “Semantic Supervenience and Referential Indeterminacy,” The Journal of Philosophy, 89: 344–361. (Scholar)
van Dalen, D., 1997, Logic and Structure, Amsterdam: Springer. (Scholar)
van Heijenoort, J. (ed.), 1967, From Frege to Gödel, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
Velleman, D., 1998, “Review of Levin 1997,” Mathematical Reviews, 98c: 1364. (Scholar)
Wang, H., 1964, A Survey of Mathematical Logic, Amsterdam: North-Holland. (Scholar)
Wright, C., 1985, “Skolem and the Skeptic,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 59: 116–137. (Scholar)
Zermelo, E., 1930, “Über Grenzzahlen und Megenbereiche: Neue Untersuchungen über die Grundlagen der Mengenlehre,” Fundamenta Mathematicae, 16: 29–47. (Scholar)

Generated Tue Oct 8 13:51:05 2024

Applied ethics	Epistemology	History of Western Philosophy	Meta-ethics	Metaphysics	Normative ethics
Philosophy of biology	Philosophy of language	Philosophy of mind	Philosophy of religion	Science Logic and Mathematics	More ...