more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Should we accept the null set as a most extraordinary individual, a little speck of sheer nothingness, a sort of black hole in the fabric of Reality itself? Not that either, I think.
Gist of Idea
The null set is not a little speck of sheer nothingness, a black hole in Reality
Source
David Lewis (Mathematics is Megethology [1993], p.09)
Book Ref
-: 'Philosophia Mathematica' [-], p.9
A Reaction
Correct!
| 10807 | Mathematics reduces to set theory, which reduces, with some mereology, to the singleton function [Lewis] |
| 10806 | Megethology is the result of adding plural quantification to mereology [Lewis] |
| 10808 | Mathematics is generalisations about singleton functions [Lewis] |
| 10809 | We can accept the null set, but not a null class, a class lacking members [Lewis] |
| 10810 | I say that absolutely any things can have a mereological fusion [Lewis] |
| 10811 | The null set plays the role of last resort, for class abstracts and for existence [Lewis] |
| 10812 | The null set is not a little speck of sheer nothingness, a black hole in Reality [Lewis] |
| 10813 | What on earth is the relationship between a singleton and an element? [Lewis] |
| 10814 | Are all singletons exact intrinsic duplicates? [Lewis] |
| 10815 | We don't need 'abstract structures' to have structural truths about successor functions [Lewis] |
| 10816 | We can use mereology to simulate quantification over relations [Lewis] |