[FOM] CH and mathematics

[Alex Blum]

Neil Tennant wrote:

>Joe Shipman wrote (Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:37:07 -0500):
>
>  
>
>>I don't see why our inability to know something should cast any doubt 
>>on its definiteness. That's epistemological arrogance.
>>    
>>
>
>The anti-realist position that all truths are in principle knowable often
>attracts this kind of criticism.
>
>But the anti-realist would say that there's another kind of arrogance at
>work behind the realist position (which is Shipman's position here). 
>It is the *semantic* arrogance of thinking that one has a grasp of such
>truth-conditions (or meaning) as make it possible for the
>(allegedly determinate) truth-value of a sentence forever to elude
>detection.
>  
>
Why is the duration of time of determination  relevant to grasping  the 
truth conditions of a sentence?
And  are the truth conditions of CH any less clear than that of 2+1=3?

Alex Blum