Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T23:51:23.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The anatytic conception of truth and the foundations of arithmetic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Peter Apostoli
Peter Apostoli*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Toronto, 215 Huron Street, 9th Floor, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaM5S 1A1, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Until very recently, it was thought that there couldn't be any current interest in logicism as a philosophy of mathematics. Indeed, there is an old argument one often finds that logicism is a simple nonstarter just in virtue of the fact that if it were a logical truth that there are infinitely many natural numbers, then this would be in conflict with the existence of finite models. It is certainly true that from the perspective of model theory, arithmetic cannot be a part of logic. However, it is equally true that model theory's reliance on a background of axiomatic set theory renders it unable to match Frege's Theorem, the derivation within second order logic of the infinity of the number series from the contextual “definition” of the cardinality operator. Called “Hume's Principle” by Boolos, the contextual definition of the cardinality operator is presented in Section 63 of Grundlagen, as the statement that, for any concepts F and G,

the number of F s = the number of G s

if, and only if,

F is equinumerous with G.

The philosophical interest in Frege's Theorem derives from the thesis, defended for example by Crispin Wright, that Hume's principle expresses our pre-analytic conception of assertions of numerical identity. However, Boolos cites the very fact that Hume's principle has only infinite models as grounds for denying that it is logically true: For Boolos, Hume's principle is simply a disguised axiom of infinity.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 65 , Issue 1 , March 2000 , pp. 33 - 102
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Apostoli, Peter J., The alethic genesis of number, Department of Philosophy, The University of Toronto, 1993.Google Scholar
[2]Apostou, Peter J., Logic, truth and number the elementary genesis of arithmetic, Department of Philosophy, The University of Toronto, to appear in The Alonzo Church memorial volume, (Zeleny, M. and Anderson, A. C., editors), Kluwer Academic, 1997, 1994.Google Scholar
[3]Apostoli, Peter J. and Kanda, Akira, The proper treatment of abstraction in programming systems, Department of Philosophy, The University of Toronto, 1995.Google Scholar
[4]Apostoli, Peter J., Naive set theory from metaphysics to mathematics, Department of Philosophy, The University of Toronto, 1997.Google Scholar
[5]Barendreght, H., Pairing without conventional restraints, Zeitschrift fÜr mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 20 (1974).Google Scholar
[6]Belnap, Nuel D., A usefulfour-valued logic, Modern uses of multiple-valued logic (Dunn, J. M. and Epstein, G., editors), D. Reidel, 1977.Google Scholar
[7]Benacerraf, Paul, Logicism some considerations, Ph.D. thesis, Princeton University, Department of Philosophy, 1960.Google Scholar
[8]Boolos, George, The consistency of Frege's “Foundations of arithmetic”, On being and saying: Essays in honor of Richard Cartwright (Thomson, Judith Jarvis, editor), MIT Press, 1987, reprinted in [17], pp. 3–20.Google Scholar
[9]Boolos, George, The standard of equality of numbers, Meaning and method: Essays in honor of Hilary Putnam (Boolos, George, editor), Cambridge University Press, 1990, reprinted in [17].Google Scholar
[10]Bunn, Robert, Developments in the foundations of mathematics, 1870–1910, From the calculus to set theory (Grattan-Guiness, , editor), Gerald Duckworth and Company, 1980.Google Scholar
[11]Carnap, R., Meaning and necessity, The University of Chicago Press, 1956, enlarged edition.Google Scholar
[12]Church, Alonzo, The calculi of lambda conversion, Princeton University Press, 1941, reprinted in 1963 by University Microfilms Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.Google Scholar
[13]Curry, Haskel B., Grundlagen der kombinatorischen logik, American Journal of Mathematics, vol. 52 (1930), pp. 509–36, 789-834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Curry, Haskel B., Combinatory logic, vol. 1, North-Holland, 1958.Google Scholar
[15]Davidson, Donald, In defense of convention T, Truth, syntax and modality (Leblanc, Hugues, editor), North-Holland, 1973.Google Scholar
[16]Demopoulos, William G., Frege and the rigorization of analysis, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 23 (1994), pp. 225–246, reprinted in [17].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Demopoulos, William G., Frege's philosophy of mathematics, Harvard University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
[18]Demopoulos, William G. and Bell, John L, Frege's theory of concepts and objects and the interpretation of second-order logic, Philosophia Mathematica (Series III), vol. 1 (1993), pp. 139–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19]Dummett, Michael A. E., Frege: Philosophy of mathematics, Harvard University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
[20]Etchemendy, John, The concept of logical consequence, Harvard University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
[21]Feferman, Solomon, Toward useful type-free theories, I, this Journal, vol. 49 (1984), pp. 75–111.Google Scholar
[22]Field, Hartry, Tarski's theory of truth, The Journal of Philosophy, vol. Lxix (1972), p. 13.Google Scholar
[23]Fitch, Fredric B., An extension of basic logic, this Journal, vol. 13 (1948), pp. 95–106.Google Scholar
[24]Fitch, Fredric B., Symbolic logic: An introduction, Ronald Press, 1955.Google Scholar
[25]Fitch, Fredric B., A complete and consistent modal set theory, this Journal, vol. 49 (1967), pp. 75–111.Google Scholar
[26]Fitch, Fredric B., A method for avoiding the Curry paradox, Essays in honor of Carl G. Hempel: A tribute on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday (Rescher, N.et al., editors), Dordrecht D. Reidel, 1969.Google Scholar
[27]Fitch, Fredric B., Elements of combinatory logic, Yale University Press, 1974.Google Scholar
[28]Fitting, Melvin, Notes on the mathematical aspects of Kripkes theory of truth, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 27 (1986), pp. 75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[29]Fitch, Fredric B., Bilattices and the theory of truth, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 18 (1989), pp. 225–256.Google Scholar
[30]Frege, G., Über Sinn und Bedeutung, 1892, translated as On sense and reference in Translations from the philosophical writtings of Gottlob Frege, second edition (Geach, P.Black, and M., editors), 1970.Google Scholar
[31]Frege, G., Die grundlagen der arithmetik, 1959, translated as The foundations of arithmetic by J. L. Austin, Blackwell, 1959.Google Scholar
[32]Frege, G., Grundgesetze der arithmetik, The University of California Press, 1964, translated (in part) by M. Furth as The basic laws of arithmetic.Google Scholar
[33]Gabbay, Dov and Geunthner, Franz (editors), Handbook of philosophical logic, Reidel, 1983–1989, four volumes.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[34]Gentzen, Gerhard, Untersuchungen uer das logiische Schliessen, Mathematissche Annalen, vol. 39 (1935), pp, 176–210, 405–431, translated as Investigations into logical deduction in [70].Google Scholar
[35]Gilmore, Paul C., On the epsilon relation, abstract of paper presented to the Association of Symbolic Logic, 1956.Google Scholar
[36]Gilmore, Paul C., An alternative to set theory, American Mathematical Monthly, vol. 67 (1960), pp. 621–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[37]Gilmore, Paul C., Partial set theory, lecture notes prepared in connection with the Summer Institute for Axiomatic Set Theory, UCLA. Los Angeles, 06 10–August 4, 1967.Google Scholar
[38]Gilmore, Paul C., Attributes, sets, partial sets and identity, Essays dedicated to A. Heyting, North-Holland, 1968.Google Scholar
[39]Gilmore, Paul C., A consistent naive set theory foundations for a formal theory of computation, Technical Report Report RC 3413 (June 22), IBM Research, 1971.Google Scholar
[40]Gilmore, Paul C., The consistency of partial set theory without extensionality, Technical Report Report RC 1973 December 21, IBM Research, 1973, reprinted in [55].Google Scholar
[41 ]Gilmore, Paul C., Combining unrestricted abstraction with universal quantification, To H. B. Curry: Essays in combinatory logic, lambda calculus and formalism, 1980.Google Scholar
[42]Gilmore, Paul C., Natural deduction based set theories: A new resolution of the old paradoxes, this Journal, vol. 51 (1986), pp. 393–411.Google Scholar
[43]Gupta, Anil K., Truth and paradox, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 11 (1982),pp. 1–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[44]Gupta, Anil K., Remarks on definition and the concept of truth, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, vol. 89 (1988–1989), pp. 227–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[45]Gupta, Anil K. and Belnap, Nuel D., The revision theory of truth, MIT Press, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[46]Hacking, Ian, Infinite analysis, Studia Leibnitiana, vol. 6 (1974).Google Scholar
[47]Heck, Richard G. Jr., The development of arithmetic in Frege's “Grundgesetze der Arithmetik”, this Journal, vol. 58 (1993), pp. 579–601, reprinted with minor revisions and a Postscript in [17].Google Scholar
[48]Hermes, H., Zum inversionsprinzip der operativen Logik, Constructivity in mathematics (Heyting, A., editor), North-Holland, 1959, pp. 62–68.Google Scholar
[49]Hermes, H., Enumerability, decidability, computability, Springer-Verlag, 1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[50]Herzberger, Hans G., Paradoxes of grounding in semantics, Journal of Philosophy, vol. ? (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[51]Herzberger, Hans G., Truth and natural language, Department of Philosophy, the University of Toronto, 1974.Google Scholar
[52]Herzberger, Hans G., Naive semantics and the liar paradox, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 79 (1982), pp. 690–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[53]Hindely, Roger J. and Seldin, Jonathan P, Introduction to combinators and Λ-calculus, London Mathematical Society Texts, 1986, 1.Google Scholar
[54]Hodges, Wilfrid, Truth in a structure, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, new series, vol. 85 (1986), pp. 135–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[55]Jech, T. (editor), Axiomatic set theory, Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 13, American Mathematics Society, 1974, part II.Google Scholar
[56]Kripke, Saul, Outline of a theory of truth, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 72 (1975), pp. 690–716, reprinted in [58].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[57]Lorenzen, P., EinfÜhrung in die operative Logik und Mathematique, Springer-Verlag, GÖtingen-Heidelberg, 1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[58]Martin, Robert L., Recent essays on truth and the liar paradox, Oxford, 1976.Google Scholar
[59]Mendelson, E., Mathematical logic, Van Nostrand, 1964.Google Scholar
[60]Parsons, C., A plea for substitutional quantification, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 68 (1971), pp. 231–237, reprinted as Chapter 2 in [61].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[61]Parsons, C., Mathematics in philosophy, Cornell University Press, 1983.Google Scholar
[62]Parsons, C., Quine on the philosophy of mathematics, Mathematics in philosophy, 1983, chapter 7.Google Scholar
[63]Parsons, C., The structuralist view of mathematical objects, Synthese, vol. 84 (1990), pp. 303–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[64]Prawitz, D., Natural deduction, Almqvist and Wiksell, Stockholm, 1965.Google Scholar
[65]Quine, W. V. O., From a logical point of view, Harvard, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[66]Russell, B. A. W., The principles of mathematics, Cambridge, 1903.Google Scholar
[67]Russell, B. A. W., The axiom of infinity, Hibbert I, vol. ? (1904), pp. 809–812.Google Scholar
[68]Russell, B. A. W., Mathematical logic as based upon the theory of types, American Journal of Mathematics, vol.? (1908), pp. 222–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[69]Russell, B. A. W., Introduction to mathematical philosophy, London, 1919.Google Scholar
[70]Sazbo, M. E. (editor), The collected papers of Gerhard Gentzen, North-Holland, 1969.Google Scholar
[71]Schütte, K., Beweistheoretische Erfassung der unendlichen Induktion in der Zahlentheorie, Mathematische Annalen, vol. 122 (1951), pp. 369–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[72]Schütte, K., Proof theory (Beweisetheorie), Springer-Verlag, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[73]Scott, Dana S., Models for various type-free calculi, Logic and methodology and philosophy of science (Suppes, P.et al., editors), vol. IV, North-Holland, 1973.Google Scholar
[74]Scott, Dana S., Combinators and classes, Λ-calculus and computer science, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 37, Springer-Verlag, 1975, pp. 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[75]Seldin, Jonathan P and Hindely, Roger J. (editors), To H. B. Curry: Essays in combinatory logic, lambda calculus and formalism, Academic Press, 1980.Google Scholar
[76]Smullyan, Raymond, First-order logic, Springer-Verlag, 1986.Google Scholar
[77]Tarski, Alfred, Uuml;ber den Begriff der logischen Folgerund, Actes du CongrÈs International de Philosophie Scientifique, vol. 7 (1936), pp. 1–11, translated into English as On the concept of logical consequence in [78].Google Scholar
[78]Tarski, Alfred, Logic, semantics and metamathematics. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1956.Google Scholar
[79]van Heijenoort, J. (editor), From Frege to GÖdel: a sourcebook in mathematical logic, 1967.Google Scholar
[80]Visser, Albert, Four valued semantics and the liar paradox, Handbook of philosophical logic, vol. 4, Reidel, 1984.Google Scholar
[81]Voda, Paul, Theory of pairs, part I, Provably recursive functions, Technical report 84-25, Department of Computer Science, University of British Columbia, 1984.Google Scholar
[82]Whitehead, A. N. and Russell, B. A. W., Principia mathematica, Cambridge, three volumes.Google Scholar
[83]Wright, Crispin, Frege's conception of numbers as objects, Scots Philosophical Monographs, no. 2, Aberdeen University Press, 1983.Google Scholar