Structural relativity and informal rigour
type: Item
instance of: scholarly article
title: Structural relativity and informal rigour
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-84706-7_6
author: Neil Barton
publication date: 2022-10-09T00:00:00Z
review text: This article deals with a basic difficulty in studying the foundation of mathematics. People want to find a system of axioms for the intended structure, but once such a system found, one gets whole classes of unintended models for the given system. In those models, all the propositions proven using the axioms are true, but a lot of other properties are model-dependent. This introduces a kind of relativism in mathematics, feature which is not agreed by most of the scientists. The author suggests ``that a promising option for representing current set-theoretic thought is given by formulating set theory using quasi-weak second-order logic''. By a theorem of Zermelo discussed by Kreisel, the second order set theory \(\text{ZFC}_2\) has only models \(M\) and \(N\) which are either isomorphic, or one of them is isomorphic with an initial segment \(V_\alpha\) of the other one, for some inaccessible \(\alpha\). For me, one of the most interesting discussions in this article is the enumeration of possibilities presented below. (I display this paragraph with the exact wording of the author.) \begin{itemize} \item[1.] We will not, as a matter of fact, go astray in justifying new axioms extending \(\text{ZFC}_2\). Challenge: If we take this horn of the quadrilemma, we then have to explain why we will not go astray in justifying new axioms. This looks like a difficult task and has the whiff of mysticism about it. \item[2.] We accept \(\text{ZFC}_2\), but also hold that we cannot justify axioms extending it (except perhaps large cardinals). \(\text{ZFC}_2\) (possibly with large cardinals added) is the limit of our possible justifications. Challenge: This option essentially gives up on trying to resolve any sentences that are not consequences of large cardinals (e.g. CH). \item[3.] An agent can become less precise by refining their set concept (if they pick an axiom with some false consequences). Challenge: This response seems counter-intuitive; conceptual refinements should resul…
Mathematics Subject Classification ID: 03A05
Mathematics Subject Classification ID: 00A30
zbMATH DE Number: 7598438
zbMATH Keywords: set theory
zbMATH Keywords: continuum hypothesis
zbMATH Keywords: higher-order logic
zbMATH Keywords: informal rigour
reviewed by: Mihai Prunescu
describes a project that uses: MathOverflow
MaRDI profile type: Publication
full work available at URL: 978-3-030-84706-7 6
OpenAlex ID: W4235970747
cites work: Q3992552
cites work: UNIVERSISM AND EXTENSIONS OF V
cites work: Forcing and the universe of sets: must we lose insight?
cites work: Maximality and ontology: how axiom content varies across philosophical frameworks
cites work: Philosophy and Model Theory
cites work: Q4454196
cites work: Q4133603
cites work: Predicative foundations of arithmetic
cites work: Mathematical Knowledge and the Interplay of Practices
cites work: Consistency of the Continuum Hypothesis. (AM-3)
cites work: The set-theoretic multiverse
cites work: Is the dream solution of the continuum hypothesis attainable?
cites work: Structuralism Without Structures
cites work: Challenges to predicative foundations of arithmetic
cites work: The Metaphysics and Mathematics of Arbitrary Objects
cites work: The graph conception of set
cites work: The Mathematical Development of Set Theory from Cantor to Cohen
cites work: Zermelo and Set Theory
cites work: Inner models from extended logics: Part 1
cites work: Large Cardinals from Determinacy
cites work: Q4099559
cites work: On Non-Eliminative Structuralism. Unlabeled Graphs as a Case Study, Part A†
cites work: Q5672898
cites work: Multiple universes of sets and indeterminate truth values
cites work: WHAT CAN A CATEGORICITY THEOREM TELL US?
cites work: Q4388799
cites work: Q4001345
cites work: Q4388801
cites work: Q4789459
cites work: Q4981738
cites work: Inner models for set theory—Part I
cites work: Inner models for set theory—Part II
cites work: Inner models for set theory – Part III
cites work: PFA implies ADL(ℝ)
cites work: Internal categoricity in arithmetic and set theory
cites work: The continuum hypothesis. I
cites work: IN SEARCH OF ULTIMATE-LTHE 19TH MIDRASHA MATHEMATICAE LECTURES
description: scientific article; zbMATH DE number 7598438