FOM: Remark on characterization of FOM

[Moshe' Machover]

Robert Tregesser writes:

>        Thanks for  the clarification --
>        that FOM is the reflective branch of mathematics,
>        that the approach is mathematical. .
>        So if the answers to Feferman's questions had a
>        mathematical content/presentation,  they'd be
>        fom rather than phom?

Yes, of course. In fact, although *some* postings to this fom-list belong,
wholly or in part, to FOM, the bulk consist mainly of philosophical and
methodological discussion *about* FOM, and therefore belong to PhOM.

The present posting--being a discussion of PhOM and of the distinction
between it and FOM--belongs to *general* philosophy.

So does the previous sentence, because (as is well known) 'what is a
philosophical question?' is a philosophical question.

And so on.

	Moshe'

  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
  %%  Moshe' Machover                 | E-MAIL: moshe.machover at kcl.ac.uk %%
  %%  Department of Philosophy        | FAX (office)*: +44 171 873 2270  %%
  %%  King's College, London          | PHONE (home)*: +44 181 969 5356  %%
  %%  Strand                          |                                  %%
  %%  London WC2R 2LS                 |  * If calling from UK, replace   %%
  %%  England                         |    +44 by 0                      %%
  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%