[FOM] Platonism, and Nik Weaver's take on ZFC

[Nik Weaver]

Tom Dunion wrote:

> In this connection, but going a bit further, I note Nik Weaver's
> liar paradox post of April 14 has a pointer to his website,
> where in item 4 he raises the concern that even if ZFC is
> consistent, there are "good reasons to suspect that some
> number-theoretic assertions provable in ZFC may be false."
>
> I'd be interested if he (or anyone) would wish to say more
> either in agreement or disagreement with that assessment.

There was a bit of discussion about this on the FOM list in May 2009,
mostly under the heading "Arithmetical soundness of ZFC".

Nik