FOM: Proper Names and the Diagonal Proof
Neil Tennant
neilt at mercutio.cohums.ohio-state.edu
Thu Jun 27 00:27:59 EDT 2002
Correction to my last posting:
The version of Cantor's theorem that I gave has as an immediate corollary
what Boolos calls Not 1-1, but not (as I over-hastily claimed) what he
calls Not Onto.
On re-reading his note, I was struck by what seems to me a much-too-strong
demand that Boolos makes for a proof of Not 1-1 (i.e. no f maps P(X) 1-1
into X) to be "constructive". For any given f, he exhibits distinct
subsets A and B of X such that f(A)=f(B). But for the constructivist, this
is actually overkill, is it not? All the constructivist really has to do
is provide a reductio of the pair of assumptions
for every subset Y of X, f(Y) is in X;
for all subsets Y, Z of X, if f(Y)=f(Z) then Y=Z.
Such a reductio need not provide such subsets A and B as Boolos does.
___________________________________________________________________
Neil W. Tennant
Professor of Philosophy and Adjunct Professor of Cognitive Science
http://www.cohums.ohio-state.edu/philo/people/tennant.html
Please send snail mail to:
Department of Philosophy
230 North Oval
The Ohio State University
Columbus, OH 43210
Work telephone (614)292-1591
Private Fax (614)488-3198
More information about the FOM
mailing list