What is Absolute Undecidability?†

Noûs 47 (3):467-481 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is often supposed that, unlike typical axioms of mathematics, the Continuum Hypothesis (CH) is indeterminate. This position is normally defended on the ground that the CH is undecidable in a way that typical axioms are not. Call this kind of undecidability “absolute undecidability”. In this paper, I seek to understand what absolute undecidability could be such that one might hope to establish that (a) CH is absolutely undecidable, (b) typical axioms are not absolutely undecidable, and (c) if a mathematical hypothesis is absolutely undecidable, then it is indeterminate. I shall argue that on no understanding of absolute undecidability could one hope to establish all of (a)–(c). However, I will identify one understanding of absolute undecidability on which one might hope to establish both (a) and (c) to the exclusion of (b). This suggests that a new style of mathematical antirealism deserves attention—one that does not depend on familiar epistemological or ontological concerns. The key idea behind this view is that typical mathematical hypotheses are indeterminate because they are relevantly similar to CH.

Similar books and articles

Gödel's incompleteness theorems.Raymond M. Smullyan - 1992 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Lou Goble.
The undecidability of the DA-Unification problem.J. Siekmann & P. Szabó - 1989 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 54 (2):402 - 414.
On the question of absolute undecidability.Peter Koellner - 2010 - In Kurt Gödel, Solomon Feferman, Charles Parsons & Stephen G. Simpson (eds.), Philosophia Mathematica. Association for Symbolic Logic. pp. 153-188.
Undecidable theories.Alfred Tarski - 1953 - Amsterdam,: North-Holland Pub. Co.. Edited by Andrzej Mostowski & Raphael M. Robinson.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-03-03

Downloads
1,891 (#4,715)

6 months
202 (#12,191)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Justin Clarke-Doane
Columbia University

Citations of this work

In defense of Countabilism.David Builes & Jessica M. Wilson - 2022 - Philosophical Studies 179 (7):2199-2236.
When Expert Disagreement Supports the Consensus.Finnur Dellsén - 2018 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 96 (1):142-156.
Replies to Rosen, Leiter, and Dutilh Novaes.Justin Clarke-Doane - 2023 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 107 (3):817-837.

View all 13 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Vagueness.Timothy Williamson - 1994 - New York: Routledge.
Truth and objectivity.Crispin Wright - 1992 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
The logical basis of metaphysics.Michael Dummett - 1991 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Science Without Numbers: A Defence of Nominalism.Hartry H. Field - 1980 - Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.
Realism, Mathematics & Modality.Hartry H. Field - 1989 - New York, NY, USA: Blackwell.

View all 51 references / Add more references