scholarly journals The Fall and Original Sin of Set Theory

Phronimon ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Francois Strauss
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Original Sin ◽  
Bertrand Russell ◽  
Foundations Of Mathematics ◽  
Classical Analysis ◽  
Mathematical System ◽  
Classical Mathematics ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Infinite Totality ◽  
Axiomatic Set Theory

Hermann Weyl published a brief survey as preface to a review of The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell in 1946. In this survey he used the phrase, “The Fall and Original Sin of Set Theory.” Investigating the background of this remark will require that we pay attention to a number of issues within the foundations of mathematics. For example: Did God make the integers—as Kronecker alleged? Is mathematics set theory? Attention will also be given to axiomatic set theory and relevant ontic pre-conditions, such as the difference between number and number symbols, to number as “an aspect of objective reality” (Gödel), integers and induction (Skolem) as well as to the question if infinity—as endlessness—could be completed. In 1831 Gauss objected to viewing the infinite as something completed, which is not allowed in mathematics. It will be argued that the actual infinite is rather connected to what is present “at once,” as an infinite totality. By the year 1900 mathematicians believed that mathematics had reached absolute rigour, but unfortunately the rest of the twentieth century witnessed the opposite. The axiom of infinity ruined the expectations of logicism—mathematics cannot be reduced to logic. The intuitionism of Brouwer, Weyl and others launched a devastating attack on classical analysis, further inspired by the outcome of Gödel’s famous proof of 1931, in which he has shown that a formal mathematical system is inconsistent or incomplete. Intuitionism created a whole new mathematics, which finds no counter-part in classical mathematics. Slater remarked that within this logical paradise of Russell lurked a serpent, hidden behind the unjustified employment of the at once infinite. According to Weyl, “This is the Fall and original sin of set theory for which it is justly punished by the antinomies.” In conclusion, a few systematic distinctions are introduced.

George Boolos. The iterative conception of set. The journal of philosophy, vol. 68 (1971), pp. 215–231. - Dana Scott. Axiomatizing set theory. Axiomatic set theory, edited by Thomas J. Jech, Proceedings of symposia in pure mathematics, vol. 13 part 2, American Mathematical Society, Providence1974, pp. 207–214. - W. N. Reinhardt. Remarks on reflection principles, large cardinals, and elementary embeddings. Axiomatic set theory, edited by Thomas J. Jech, Proceedings of symposia in pure mathematics, vol. 13 part 2, American Mathematical Society, Providence1974, pp. 189–205. - W. N. Reinhardt. Set existence principles of Shoenfield, Ackermann, and Powell. Fundament a mathematicae, vol. 84 (1974), pp. 5–34. - Hao Wang. Large sets. Logic, foundations of mathematics, and computahility theory. Part one of the proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, London, Ontario, Canada–1975, edited by Robert E. Butts and Jaakko Hintikka, The University of Western Ontario series in philosophy of science, vol. 9, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht and Boston1977, pp. 309–333. - Charles Parsons. What is the iterative conception of set?Logic, foundations of mathematics, and computahility theory. Part one of the proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, London, Ontario, Canada–1975, edited by Robert E. Butts and Jaakko Hintikka, The University of Western Ontario series in philosophy of science, vol. 9, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht and Boston1977, pp. 335–367.

1985 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 544-547 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. Burgess
Keyword(s):  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Set Theory ◽  
American Mathematical Society ◽  
Publishing Company ◽  
Foundations Of Mathematics ◽  
Reidel Publishing Company ◽  
Pure Mathematics ◽  
Iterative Conception ◽  
The University ◽  
Axiomatic Set Theory

Category theory, applications to the foundations of mathematics

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin McLarty
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Category Theory ◽  
Classical Logic ◽  
Elementary Theory ◽  
Mathematical Structure ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Foundations Of Mathematics ◽  
Logical Foundations ◽  
Classical Mathematics ◽  
The 1960S

Since the 1960s Lawvere has distinguished two senses of the foundations of mathematics. Logical foundations use formal axioms to organize the subject. The other sense aims to survey ‘what is universal in mathematics’. The ontology of mathematics is a third, related issue. Moderately categorical foundations use sets as axiomatized by the elementary theory of the category of sets (ETCS) rather than Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (ZF). This claims to make set theory conceptually more like the rest of mathematics than ZF is. And it suggests that sets are not ‘made of’ anything determinate; they only have determinate functional relations to one another. The ZF and ETCS axioms both support classical mathematics. Other categories have also been offered as logical foundations. The ‘category of categories’ takes categories and functors as fundamental. The ‘free topos’ (see Lambek and Couture 1991) stresses provability. These and others are certainly formally adequate. The question is how far they illuminate the most universal aspects of current mathematics. Radically categorical foundations say mathematics has no one starting point; each mathematical structure exists in its own right and can be described intrinsically. The most flexible way to do this to date is categorically. From this point of view various structures have their own logic. Sets have classical logic, or rather the topos Set has classical logic. But differential manifolds, for instance, fit neatly into a topos Spaces with nonclassical logic. This view urges a broader practice of mathematics than classical. This article assumes knowledge of category theory on the level of Category theory, introduction to §1.

A homogeneous system for formal logic

1943 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. M. Martin
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
General Type ◽  
Homogeneous System ◽  
Formal Logic ◽  
Strict Sense ◽  
Standard Methods ◽  
Logical Construction ◽  
Logical Type ◽  
Classical Mathematics ◽  
Axiomatic Set Theory

Two more or less standard methods exist for the systematic, logical construction of classical mathematics, the so-called theory of types, due in the main to Russell, and the Zermelo axiomatic set theory. In systems based upon either of these, the connective of membership, “ε”, plays a fundamental role. Usually although not always it figures as a primitive or undefined symbol.Following the familiar simplification of Russell's theory, let us mean by a logical type in the strict sense any one of the following: (i) the totality consisting exclusively of individuals, (ii) the totality consisting exclusively of classes whose members are exclusively individuals, (iii) the totality consisting exclusively of classes whose members are exclusively classes whose members in turn are exclusively individuals, and so on. Any entity from (ii) is said to be one type higher than any entity from (i), any entity from (iii), one type higher than any entity from (ii), and so on. In systems based upon this simplified theory of types, the only significant atomic formulae involving “ε” are those asserting the membership of an entity in an entity one type higher. Thus any expression of the form “(x∈y)” is meaningless except where “y” denotes an entity of just one type higher than the type of the entity denoted by “x” It is by means of general type restrictions of this kind that the Russell and other paradoxes are avoided.

Kronecker, Leopold (1823–91)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulrich Majer
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Set Theory ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Academic Institution ◽  
Late Nineteenth Century ◽  
Foundations Of Mathematics ◽  
Epistemological Perspective ◽  
Classical Mathematics ◽  
Late Nineteenth

Leopold Kronecker was one of the most influential German mathematicians of the late nineteenth century. He exercised a strong sociopolitical influence on the development of mathematics as an academic institution. From a philosophical point of view, his main significance lies in his anticipation of a new and rigorous epistemological perspective with regard to the foundations of mathematics: Kronecker became the father of intuitionism or constructivism, which stands in strict opposition to the methods of classical mathematics and their canonization by set theory.

scholarly journals Hybrid structures applied to ideals in near-rings

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Elavarasan ◽  
G. Muhiuddin ◽  
K. Porselvi ◽  
Y. B. Jun
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Fuzzy Set ◽  
Real World ◽  
Rough Set Theory ◽  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
Hybrid Structure ◽  
Soft Set ◽  
Hybrid Structures ◽  
Classical Mathematics ◽  
Classical Means

AbstractHuman endeavours span a wide spectrum of activities which includes solving fascinating problems in the realms of engineering, arts, sciences, medical sciences, social sciences, economics and environment. To solve these problems, classical mathematics methods are insufficient. The real-world problems involve many uncertainties making them difficult to solve by classical means. The researchers world over have established new mathematical theories such as fuzzy set theory and rough set theory in order to model the uncertainties that appear in various fields mentioned above. In the recent days, soft set theory has been developed which offers a novel way of solving real world issues as the issue of setting the membership function does not arise. This comes handy in solving numerous problems and many advancements are being made now-a-days. Jun introduced hybrid structure utilizing the ideas of a fuzzy set and a soft set. It is to be noted that hybrid structures are a speculation of soft set and fuzzy set. In the present work, the notion of hybrid ideals of a near-ring is introduced. Significant work has been carried out to investigate a portion of their significant properties. These notions are characterized and their relations are established furthermore. For a hybrid left (resp., right) ideal, different left (resp., right) ideal structures of near-rings are constructed. Efforts have been undertaken to display the relations between the hybrid product and hybrid intersection. Finally, results based on homomorphic hybrid preimage of a hybrid left (resp., right) ideals are proved.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document