[FOM] Permanent value revisited

Neil Tennant neilt at mercutio.cohums.ohio-state.edu
Sat May 15 22:23:11 EDT 2004

On Sat, 15 May 2004, Robbie Lindauer wrote:

> What about marxism or deconstruction?

Do you seriously expect a serious reply to such a question from members of 
the fom list?
> If you say "an enduring value for FOM is proof" of the kinds you 
> enumerated above, then wouldn't the excellent subject for study be the 
> rigorous proofs of the axioms?   Perhaps a secondary subject might be a 
> clarification of the underdefined notions in the system like "set" 
> "truth" "arbitrary function", etc.

Hmm... And what would those "rigorous proofs" begin with? Non-axioms?
> Say that the powerset axiom is false and there is no powerset of N.   
> Then cantor's proof isn't a proof.  

You are simply mistaken. This has been hashed out on this list before.
Cantor's proof does not require the powerset axiom. Please see


Neil Tennant

More information about the FOM mailing list