[FOM] The defence of well-founded set theory
wgreenb at gmail.com
Mon Oct 3 02:56:44 EDT 2005
I would be particularly interested in your reaction to Boolos's "Must
We Believe In Set Theory?" (article no. 8 in Boolos's book).
On 9/27/05, Roger Bishop Jones <rbj01 at rbjones.com> wrote:
> Having read Nik Weaver's attempt to motivate predicativism by a
> critique of set theory, I find myself inclined to attempt some
> writing on this topic (I am myself inclined to be skeptical
> about the strength of arguments against set theory).
> Not being of a scholarly nature, it is my inclination to do
> this by rereading the section on set theory in
> Boolos's "Logic, Logic and Logic" and then proceed to an analysis
> without further reading.
> I would be interested to know from anyone willing to share the
> information, which work, for or against set theory, they would
> consider my most serious omission were I to proceed in this way.
> Roger Jones
> FOM mailing list
> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
More information about the FOM