FOM: ultrafinitism; objective vs. subjective
sazonov at logic.botik.ru
Thu Mar 19 23:25:25 EST 1998
Todd Wilson wrote:
> Vladimir Sazonov writes:
> > Then, we are using some ideas, abstract notions like the natural
> > numbers. These ideas are also subjective in the sense that they
> > are our creations (with the roots in reality, of course) and
> > often vague. What is not vague, is any concrete tool we use (a
> > formal system with explicitly fixed rules and axioms).
> But isn't a "concrete" formal system with axioms and rules at least as
> vague as the natural numbers? The formulas being manipulated by such
> formal systems, as well as the proofs themselves, are defined by
> structural induction and can grow to arbitrary size, just as the
> natural numbers can.
Yeas, you are right. But when we prove a concrete theorem,
everything is OK.
Program Systems Institute, | Tel. +7-08535-98945 (Inst.),
Russian Acad. of Sci. | Fax. +7-08535-20566
Pereslavl-Zalessky, | e-mail: sazonov at logic.botik.ru
152140, RUSSIA | http://www.botik.ru/~logic/SAZONOV/
More information about the FOM