88 ideas
18137 | Impredicative definitions are wrong, because they change the set that is being defined? [Bostock] |
18122 | Classical interdefinitions of logical constants and quantifiers is impossible in intuitionism [Bostock] |
18114 | There is no single agreed structure for set theory [Bostock] |
18107 | A 'proper class' cannot be a member of anything [Bostock] |
18115 | We could add axioms to make sets either as small or as large as possible [Bostock] |
18139 | The Axiom of Choice relies on reference to sets that we are unable to describe [Bostock] |
18105 | Replacement enforces a 'limitation of size' test for the existence of sets [Bostock] |
18109 | The completeness of first-order logic implies its compactness [Bostock] |
18108 | First-order logic is not decidable: there is no test of whether any formula is valid [Bostock] |
10373 | Logical form can't dictate metaphysics, as it may propose an undesirable property [Schaffer,J] |
18123 | Substitutional quantification is just standard if all objects in the domain have a name [Bostock] |
18120 | The Deduction Theorem is what licenses a system of natural deduction [Bostock] |
18125 | Berry's Paradox considers the meaning of 'The least number not named by this name' [Bostock] |
18100 | ω + 1 is a new ordinal, but its cardinality is unchanged [Bostock] |
18101 | Each addition changes the ordinality but not the cardinality, prior to aleph-1 [Bostock] |
18102 | A cardinal is the earliest ordinal that has that number of predecessors [Bostock] |
18106 | Aleph-1 is the first ordinal that exceeds aleph-0 [Bostock] |
18095 | Instead of by cuts or series convergence, real numbers could be defined by axioms [Bostock] |
18099 | The number of reals is the number of subsets of the natural numbers [Bostock] |
18093 | For Eudoxus cuts in rationals are unique, but not every cut makes a real number [Bostock] |
18110 | Infinitesimals are not actually contradictory, because they can be non-standard real numbers [Bostock] |
18156 | Modern axioms of geometry do not need the real numbers [Bostock] |
18097 | The Peano Axioms describe a unique structure [Bostock] |
18149 | There are many criteria for the identity of numbers [Bostock] |
18148 | Hume's Principle is a definition with existential claims, and won't explain numbers [Bostock] |
18145 | Many things will satisfy Hume's Principle, so there are many interpretations of it [Bostock] |
18143 | Frege makes numbers sets to solve the Caesar problem, but maybe Caesar is a set! [Bostock] |
18116 | Numbers can't be positions, if nothing decides what position a given number has [Bostock] |
18117 | Structuralism falsely assumes relations to other numbers are numbers' only properties [Bostock] |
18141 | Nominalism about mathematics is either reductionist, or fictionalist [Bostock] |
18157 | Nominalism as based on application of numbers is no good, because there are too many applications [Bostock] |
18150 | Actual measurement could never require the precision of the real numbers [Bostock] |
18158 | Ordinals are mainly used adjectively, as in 'the first', 'the second'... [Bostock] |
18127 | Simple type theory has 'levels', but ramified type theory has 'orders' [Bostock] |
18144 | Neo-logicists agree that HP introduces number, but also claim that it suffices for the job [Bostock] |
18147 | Neo-logicists meet the Caesar problem by saying Hume's Principle is unique to number [Bostock] |
18111 | Treating numbers as objects doesn't seem like logic, since arithmetic fixes their totality [Bostock] |
18129 | Many crucial logicist definitions are in fact impredicative [Bostock] |
18146 | If Hume's Principle is the whole story, that implies structuralism [Bostock] |
18159 | Higher cardinalities in sets are just fairy stories [Bostock] |
18155 | A fairy tale may give predictions, but only a true theory can give explanations [Bostock] |
18140 | The best version of conceptualism is predicativism [Bostock] |
18138 | Conceptualism fails to grasp mathematical properties, infinity, and objective truth values [Bostock] |
18133 | The usual definitions of identity and of natural numbers are impredicative [Bostock] |
18131 | If abstracta only exist if they are expressible, there can only be denumerably many of them [Bostock] |
18134 | Predicativism makes theories of huge cardinals impossible [Bostock] |
18135 | If mathematics rests on science, predicativism may be the best approach [Bostock] |
18136 | If we can only think of what we can describe, predicativism may be implied [Bostock] |
18132 | The predicativity restriction makes a difference with the real numbers [Bostock] |
10367 | There is only one fact - the True [Schaffer,J] |
13076 | Scholastics treat relations as two separate predicates of the relata [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
13102 | If you individuate things by their origin, you still have to individuate the origins themselves [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
13103 | Numerical difference is a symmetrical notion, unlike proper individuation [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
13104 | Haecceity as property, or as colourless thisness, or as singleton set [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
13100 | Maybe 'substance' is more of a mass-noun than a count-noun [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
13068 | We can ask for the nature of substance, about type of substance, and about individual substances [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
13069 | The general assumption is that substances cannot possibly be non-substances [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
13072 | Modern essences are sets of essential predicate-functions [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
17080 | Modern essentialists express essence as functions from worlds to extensions for predicates [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
13101 | Necessity-of-origin won't distinguish ex nihilo creations, or things sharing an origin [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
13081 | Even extreme modal realists might allow transworld identity for abstract objects [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
13071 | We can go beyond mere causal explanations if we believe in an 'order of being' [Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
18121 | In logic a proposition means the same when it is and when it is not asserted [Bostock] |
10359 | In causation there are three problems of relata, and three metaphysical problems [Schaffer,J] |
10372 | Causation may not be transitive; the last event may follow from the first, but not be caused by it [Schaffer,J] |
10374 | There are at least ten theories about causal connections [Schaffer,J] |
10366 | Causation transcends nature, because absences can cause things [Schaffer,J] |
10377 | Causation may not be a process, if a crucial part of the process is 'disconnected' [Schaffer,J] |
10378 | A causal process needs to be connected to the effect in the right way [Schaffer,J] |
10382 | Causation can't be a process, because a process needs causation as a primitive [Schaffer,J] |
10375 | At least four rivals have challenged the view that causal direction is time direction [Schaffer,J] |
10389 | Causal order must be temporal, or else causes could be blocked, and time couldn't be explained [Schaffer,J] |
10390 | Causal order is not temporal, because of time travel, and simultanous, joint or backward causes [Schaffer,J] |
10380 | Causation is primitive; it is too intractable and central to be reduced; all explanations require it [Schaffer,J] |
10385 | If causation is just observables, or part of common sense, or vacuous, it can't be primitive [Schaffer,J] |
10388 | Causation is utterly essential for numerous philosophical explanations [Schaffer,J] |
10387 | The notion of causation allows understanding of science, without appearing in equations [Schaffer,J] |
10384 | If two different causes are possible in one set of circumstances, causation is primitive [Schaffer,J] |
10386 | If causation is primitive, it can be experienced in ourselves, or inferred as best explanation [Schaffer,J] |
10361 | Events are fairly course-grained (just saying 'hello'), unlike facts (like saying 'hello' loudly) [Schaffer,J] |
10360 | Causal relata are events - or facts, features, tropes, states, situations or aspects [Schaffer,J] |
10362 | One may defend three or four causal relata, as in 'c causes e rather than e*' [Schaffer,J] |
10368 | If causal relata must be in nature and fine-grained, neither facts nor events will do [Schaffer,J] |
10383 | The relata of causation (such as events) need properties as explanation, which need causation! [Schaffer,J] |
10393 | Our selection of 'the' cause is very predictable, so must have a basis [Schaffer,J] |
10394 | Selecting 'the' cause must have a basis; there is no causation without such a selection [Schaffer,J] |
10376 | The actual cause may make an event less likely than a possible more effective cause [Schaffer,J] |
10381 | All four probability versions of causation may need causation to be primitive [Schaffer,J] |