Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Lynch,MP/Glasgow,JM, J.M.E. McTaggart and Shaughan Lavine

expand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these philosophers


48 ideas

4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 1. Set Theory
Second-order set theory just adds a version of Replacement that quantifies over functions [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 2. Mechanics of Set Theory / b. Terminology of ST
An 'upper bound' is the greatest member of a subset; there may be several of these, so there is a 'least' one [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 3. Types of Set / a. Types of set
Collections of things can't be too big, but collections by a rule seem unlimited in size [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 3. Types of Set / d. Infinite Sets
Those who reject infinite collections also want to reject the Axiom of Choice [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 4. Axioms for Sets / g. Axiom of Powers VI
The Power Set is just the collection of functions from one collection to another [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 4. Axioms for Sets / h. Axiom of Replacement VII
Replacement was immediately accepted, despite having very few implications [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 4. Axioms for Sets / i. Axiom of Foundation VIII
Foundation says descending chains are of finite length, blocking circularity, or ungrounded sets [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 4. Axioms for Sets / j. Axiom of Choice IX
Pure collections of things obey Choice, but collections defined by a rule may not [Lavine]
The controversy was not about the Axiom of Choice, but about functions as arbitrary, or given by rules [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 5. Conceptions of Set / c. Logical sets
The 'logical' notion of class has some kind of definition or rule to characterise the class [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 5. Conceptions of Set / e. Iterative sets
The iterative conception of set wasn't suggested until 1947 [Lavine]
The iterative conception needs the Axiom of Infinity, to show how far we can iterate [Lavine]
The iterative conception doesn't unify the axioms, and has had little impact on mathematical proofs [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 5. Conceptions of Set / f. Limitation of Size
Limitation of Size: if it's the same size as a set, it's a set; it uses Replacement [Lavine]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 6. Ordering in Sets
A collection is 'well-ordered' if there is a least element, and all of its successors can be identified [Lavine]
5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 7. Second-Order Logic
Second-order logic presupposes a set of relations already fixed by the first-order domain [Lavine]
5. Theory of Logic / D. Assumptions for Logic / 2. Excluded Middle
Mathematical proof by contradiction needs the law of excluded middle [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 1. Mathematics
Mathematics is nowadays (thanks to set theory) regarded as the study of structure, not of quantity [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 3. Nature of Numbers / b. Types of number
Every rational number, unlike every natural number, is divisible by some other number [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 3. Nature of Numbers / g. Real numbers
For the real numbers to form a set, we need the Continuum Hypothesis to be true [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 3. Nature of Numbers / h. Reals from Cauchy
Cauchy gave a necessary condition for the convergence of a sequence [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 3. Nature of Numbers / i. Reals from cuts
The two sides of the Cut are, roughly, the bounding commensurable ratios [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 4. Using Numbers / c. Counting procedure
Counting results in well-ordering, and well-ordering makes counting possible [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 5. The Infinite / a. The Infinite
The theory of infinity must rest on our inability to distinguish between very large sizes [Lavine]
The infinite is extrapolation from the experience of indefinitely large size [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 5. The Infinite / c. Potential infinite
The intuitionist endorses only the potential infinite [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 5. The Infinite / f. Uncountable infinities
'Aleph-0' is cardinality of the naturals, 'aleph-1' the next cardinal, 'aleph-ω' the ω-th cardinal [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 5. The Infinite / h. Ordinal infinity
Ordinals are basic to Cantor's transfinite, to count the sets [Lavine]
Paradox: the class of all ordinals is well-ordered, so must have an ordinal as type - giving a bigger ordinal [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 5. The Infinite / i. Cardinal infinity
Paradox: there is no largest cardinal, but the class of everything seems to be the largest [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / B. Foundations for Mathematics / 6. Mathematics as Set Theory / a. Mathematics is set theory
Set theory will found all of mathematics - except for the notion of proof [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / C. Sources of Mathematics / 1. Mathematical Platonism / b. Against mathematical platonism
Modern mathematics works up to isomorphism, and doesn't care what things 'really are' [Lavine]
6. Mathematics / C. Sources of Mathematics / 10. Constructivism / b. Intuitionism
Intuitionism rejects set-theory to found mathematics [Lavine]
7. Existence / B. Change in Existence / 1. Nature of Change
How could change consist of a conjunction of changeless facts? [McTaggart, by Le Poidevin]
Change is not just having two different qualities at different points in some series [McTaggart]
7. Existence / C. Structure of Existence / 3. Levels of Reality
A necessary relation between fact-levels seems to be a further irreducible fact [Lynch/Glasgow]
7. Existence / C. Structure of Existence / 5. Supervenience / c. Significance of supervenience
If some facts 'logically supervene' on some others, they just redescribe them, adding nothing [Lynch/Glasgow]
7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 6. Physicalism
Nonreductive materialism says upper 'levels' depend on lower, but don't 'reduce' [Lynch/Glasgow]
The hallmark of physicalism is that each causal power has a base causal power under it [Lynch/Glasgow]
9. Objects / B. Unity of Objects / 2. Substance / d. Substance defined
Substance has to exist, with no intrinsic qualities or relations [McTaggart]
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / b. Relative time
For McTaggart time is seen either as fixed, or as relative to events [McTaggart, by Ayer]
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / i. Denying time
A-series time positions are contradictory, and yet all events occupy all of them! [McTaggart, by Le Poidevin]
Time involves change, only the A-series explains change, but it involves contradictions, so time is unreal [McTaggart, by Lowe]
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 2. Passage of Time / a. Experience of time
There could be no time if nothing changed [McTaggart]
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 2. Passage of Time / d. Time series
The B-series can be inferred from the A-series, but not the other way round [McTaggart, by Le Poidevin]
A-series uses past, present and future; B-series uses 'before' and 'after' [McTaggart, by Girle]
A-series expressions place things in time, and their truth varies; B-series is relative, and always true [McTaggart, by Lowe]
The B-series must depend on the A-series, because change must be explained [McTaggart, by Le Poidevin]