14 ideas
| 10061 | The If-thenist view only seems to work for the axiomatised portions of mathematics [Musgrave] |
| 10065 | Perhaps If-thenism survives in mathematics if we stick to first-order logic [Musgrave] |
| 10050 | A statement is logically true if it comes out true in all interpretations in all (non-empty) domains [Musgrave] |
| 10049 | Logical truths may contain non-logical notions, as in 'all men are men' [Musgrave] |
| 10058 | No two numbers having the same successor relies on the Axiom of Infinity [Musgrave] |
| 10063 | Formalism is a bulwark of logical positivism [Musgrave] |
| 10062 | Formalism seems to exclude all creative, growing mathematics [Musgrave] |
| 9052 | Vague predicates lack application; there are no borderline cases; vague F is not F [Unger, by Keefe/Smith] |
| 16070 | There are no objects with proper parts; there are only mereological simples [Unger, by Wasserman] |
| 6493 | We are not conscious of pure liquidity, but of the liquidity of water [Firth] |
| 8724 | The meaning of 'know' does not change from courtroom to living room [Unger] |
| 8722 | No one knows anything, and no one is ever justified or reasonable [Unger] |
| 8723 | An evil scientist may give you a momentary life, with totally false memories [Unger] |
| 10060 | Logical positivists adopted an If-thenist version of logicism about numbers [Musgrave] |