[FOM] formalism

[Rupert McCallum]

--- V.Sazonov at csc.liv.ac.uk wrote:
> 
> The above definition does not require any metatheory. Formal systems 
> are assumed to be considered in a naive manner (to avoid the evident 
> vicious circle) as I described in another recent posting answering to
> 

But what statements are accepted as known from this naive point of
view? Edward Nelson considers the consistency of Robinson Arithmetic to
be an open problem. Do you? Supposing a dispute arose between two
formalists about that issue, wouldn't it have to be settled by a choice
of metatheory?


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited 
(http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited)