[FOM] Why Voevodsky was concerned about the foundations of the natural numbers?
Dr A. Koutsoukou-Argyraki
ak2110 at cam.ac.uk
Wed Aug 8 13:13:49 EDT 2018
Jos? Manuel Rodriguez Caballero wrote:
> I guess that Voevodsky was motivated to worry about the foundations of
> natural numbers by his intuition from elementary topos theory, where a
> number object does not always exist. Indeed, he was motivated by
> the formalisation of category theory in UniMath.
> Cultures without numbers, or with only one or two precise numbers,
> the Munduruku and Pirah? in Amazonia. Researchers have also studied
> adults in Nicaragua who were never taught number words. So, it seems
> natural numbers are a cultural phenomenon of some civilizations rather
> a knowledge given a priori. In Jean B?nabou's language, the word "very"
> a sort of fossil from a time when the Western civilization didn't have
> natural numbers.
I would like to point out the following:
The fact that certain cultures have no concept of natural numbers
should tell us nothing about the well-foundedness (or not) of natural
numbers as we know them. In the same sense that the fact that the
ancient Greeks had not conceived
non-Euclidean geometries tells us nothing about the well-foundedness of
Your comment tells me that you are a platonist who believes in universal
and I have nothing against platonism, but be careful here: even the most
platonist would never claim that because an individual/a group of
have not attained a certain universal truth, then this truth is not
universal or even problematic. And indeed, survival without having
attained certain universal truths is absolutely possible.
More information about the FOM