[FOM] Replacement

[Thomas Forster]

What i want to know is this.  There are these people who repudiate 
replacement.  What is going on in their heads?  Perhaps they mean 
ZFC is inconsistent.  Perhaps they mean it is consistent but just
happens not to be true.  Perhaps they think replacement is true but 
they don't want it to be a core axiom.

For my part i think you probably have to be Deeply Confused to be 
a replacement-denier, so it may well be that some or all of them 
believe a linear combination of some or all of the above - or 
perhaps something else entirely.  I would be grateful for any 
light that list-members can shed on this matter.


On Fri, 17 Aug 2007, Timothy Y. Chow wrote (inter alia):

> 
> Unless Thomas Forster really meant to ask if anybody believes that 
> Replacement is *inconsistent* with the other axioms of ZFC.  That's an 
> entirely different question.
> 
> Tim

-- 
Home page: www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~tf; dpmms phone +44-1223-337981. 
In NZ until october work ph +64-3367001 and ask for extension 8152.
Mobile in NZ +64-21-0580093 (Mobile in UK +44-7887-701-562).