FOM: Iterative conception of set: comment on Silver
csilver at sophia.smith.edu
Thu Jan 22 07:00:15 EST 1998
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998, Moshe' Machover wrote:
> Silver mentions attempts by Boolos and Shoenfield (to which must be added
> Kreisel and others--all foreshadowed by Zermelo's 1930 paper) to justify
> the axioms of ZF by the iterative conception of sets.
> This justifiaction is not very convincing for the replacement axiom. At
> least, I for one have never been convinced by it. If I am not mistaken,
> Boolos also admits as much in a paper published 1989(?).
Boolos's conception is much weaker than Shoenfield's. Shoenfield
gives a kind of "proof" of replacement, but it relies on his 'principle of
cofinality', which in turn relies on being able to "visualize" the
completion of various stages of set construction. I suspect that what you
are not convinced of is "visualization". At least, that's the part that
More information about the FOM