Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> Peter Jones writes (quoting Bruno Marchal):
>
>
>>>Frankly I don't think so. Set platonism can be considered as a bold
>>>assumption, but number platonism, as I said you need a sophisticated
>>>form of finitism to doubt it. I recall it is just the belief that the
>>>propositions of elementary arithmetic are independent of you.
>>
>>Arithemtical Platonism is the belief that mathematical
>>structures *exist* independently of you,
>>not just that they are true independently of you.
>
>
> What's the difference?
>
> Stathis Papaioannou
You could regard the theorems of arithmetic as just being relative to Peano's
axioms: "1+1=2 assuming Peano" Somewhat as Bruno presents his theorems as
relative to the "axiom" of COMP.
Brent Meeker
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Fri Aug 18 2006 - 00:53:46 PDT