Skolem Redux

Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 41 (4):399--414 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Hume's Principle requires the existence of the finite cardinals and their cardinal, but these are the only cardinals the Principle requires. Were the Principle an analysis of the concept of cardinal number, it would already be peculiar that it requires the existence of any cardinals; an analysis of bachelor is not expected to yield unmarried men. But that it requires the existence of some cardinals, the countable ones, but not others, the uncountable, makes it seem invidious; it is as if an analysis of people required that there be men but not women, or whites but not blacks. If we deprive the Principle of existential commitments, it will cease to yield Dedekind's axioms for the natural numbers and so fail a good test of material adequacy. But since there are cardinals no second-order theory guarantees, neither can the Principle be beefed up to require all cardinals

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Mathematics of Skolem's Paradox.Timothy Bays - 2006 - In Dale Jacquette (ed.), Philosophy of Logic. North Holland. pp. 615--648.
Reflections on Skolem's Paradox.Timothy Bays - 2000 - Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles
On Gödel's awareness of Skolem's Helsinki lecture.Mark van Atten - 2005 - History and Philosophy of Logic 26 (4):321-326.
Skolem's Paradox.Timothy Bays - 2012 - In Peter Adamson (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Skolem's promises and paradoxes.W. D. Hart - 1970 - Journal of Philosophy 67 (4):98-109.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
45 (#345,268)

6 months
15 (#157,754)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Ontological relativity and other essays.Willard Van Orman Quine (ed.) - 1969 - New York: Columbia University Press.
What numbers could not be.Paul Benacerraf - 1965 - Philosophical Review 74 (1):47-73.
Nominalist platonism.George Boolos - 1985 - Philosophical Review 94 (3):327-344.
Completeness in the theory of types.Leon Henkin - 1950 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 15 (2):81-91.
On second-order logic.George S. Boolos - 1975 - Journal of Philosophy 72 (16):509-527.

View all 15 references / Add more references