[FOM] Choice of new axioms 1
praatika@mappi.helsinki.fi
praatika at mappi.helsinki.fi
Fri Feb 17 08:37:44 EST 2006
Quoting Andrej Bauer <Andrej.Bauer at andrej.com>:
> I put this forth as a general strategy for mathematics,
> not just ZFC.
Your view seems then amount to what has been called "if-then-ism" (Putnam)
or "deductivism" (Resnik) in the philosophy of mathematics. Such a view has
been advanced for example by Russell, Hilbert and Putnam at some point of
their career (as well as certain logical positivists, as a way to try to
salvage logicism (fails)). It is a widely held opinion that this view faces
deep problems, but unfortunately I can't go to them now (I am away from my
office, in London, and terribly busy at the moment) - maybe little later.
(Maybe somebody else here can continue?)
> And since I am not advocating total mathematical anarchy,
> yet, there should be some principle for selecting certain
> axioms (and logics) over others.
Yes, that's one of the problems...
> A visible consequence of what I am suggesting is this: young
> mathematicians should _not_ be taught a single "standard" kind
> of logic and axiom system. Instead, students should be taught
> how to think with or without classical logic, axiom of choice,
> large cardinals, powersets, etc. In effect I am proposing that
> f.o.m.ers make themselves indispensable for the forseeable
> future. Surely you must agree :-)
Yes, I think I agree with you on that, even if I think myself as a kind of
absolutist.
All the Best, Panu
Panu Raatikainen
Ph.D., Academy Research Fellow,
Docent in Theoretical Philosophy
Department of Philosophy,
University of Helsinki
Finland
Visiting Fellow,
Institute of Philosophy,
School of Advanced Studies,
University of London
E-mail: panu.raatikainen at helsinki.fi
http://www.helsinki.fi/collegium/eng/Raatikainen/raatikainen.htm
More information about the FOM
mailing list