more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 13669

[filed under theme 5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 2. History of Logic ]

Full Idea

In 1910 Weyl observed that set theory seemed to presuppose natural numbers, and he regarded numbers as more fundamental than sets, as did Fraenkel. Dedekind had developed set theory independently, and used it to formulate numbers.

Gist of Idea

Can one develop set theory first, then derive numbers, or are numbers more basic?

Source

Stewart Shapiro (Foundations without Foundationalism [1991], 7.2.2)

Book Ref

Shapiro,Stewart: 'Foundations without Foundationalism' [OUP 1991], p.182


The 15 ideas with the same theme [origins of the various systems of formal logic]:

Lull's combinatorial art would articulate all the basic concepts, then show how they combine [Lull, by Arthur,R]
Boole made logic more mathematical, with algebra, quantifiers and probability [Boole, by Friend]
In 1879 Frege developed second order logic [Frege, by Putnam]
We have no adequate logic at the moment, so mathematicians must create one [Veblen]
Gentzen introduced a natural deduction calculus (NK) in 1934 [Gentzen, by Read]
Before the late 19th century logic was trivialised by not dealing with relations [Putnam]
Nowadays logic is seen as the science of extensions, not intensions [Scruton]
The mainstream of modern logic sees it as a branch of mathematics [Mayberry]
Golden ages: 1900-1960 for pure logic, and 1950-1985 for applied logic [Devlin]
Montague's intensional logic incorporated the notion of meaning [Devlin]
Skolem and Gödel championed first-order, and Zermelo, Hilbert, and Bernays championed higher-order [Shapiro]
Bernays (1918) formulated and proved the completeness of propositional logic [Shapiro]
Can one develop set theory first, then derive numbers, or are numbers more basic? [Shapiro]
The view of logic as knowing a body of truths looks out-of-date [Beall/Restall]
Was logic a branch of mathematics, or mathematics a branch of logic? [Engelbretsen]