[FOM] Certainty in mathematical proofs, part 2
Vladimir Sazonov
Vladimir.Sazonov at liverpool.ac.uk
Sun Oct 21 19:51:41 EDT 2007
On 21 Oct 2007 at 0:41, Arnon Avron wrote:
while everything
> provable in PA *is* absolutely certain (I simply find it hard to
> believe someone who denies the latter. I think
> that s/he is fooling herself/himself).
In the line of my reply to you
http://www.cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2007-October/012084.html
there is no need to mention here absolute certainty. Say, you could
write: "Let us consider what is predicativity over the natural numbers
as formalized in PA (or may be in its reasonable extension to be
understood later) in the following way using such an such novel
approach and ideas". I am sure you will loose nothing, except doubtful
usage of term "absolute" (which you seemingly cannot explain himself -
you express only feeling or belief, and appeal to the community). Of
course, in further steps and argumentation you will probably use the
term "absolute" in its known set theoretic technical and simultaneously
intuitive sense which probably will give you the possibility to express
whatever you want essential on absoluteness and predicativity, now
quite legally and avoiding any mysticism.
Vladimir
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
More information about the FOM
mailing list