Symmetry as a Criterion for Comprehension Motivating Quine’s ‘New Foundations’
- 66 Downloads
A common objection to Quine’s set theory “New Foundations” is that it is inadequately motivated because the restriction on comprehension which appears to avert paradox is a syntactical trick. We present a semantic criterion for determining whether a class is a set (a kind of symmetry) which motivates NF.
KeywordsNew Foundations symmetry Rieger-Bernays permutation methods
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Forster, T. E., Set Theory with a Universal Set, second edition, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1995. NOTE: seek page refs for invariance of s.c., s.c. not a set, s.c. wellordered not a set.Google Scholar
- 4.reference for setlike from Forster.Google Scholar
- 5.Forster, T. E., ‘AC fails in the natural analogues of V and L that model the stratified fragment of ZF’, preprint, found at http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~tf or from the author.
- 6.Grishin V.N. (1969). ‘Consistency of a fragment of Quine’s NF system.’ Sov. Math. Dokl. 10: 1387–1390Google Scholar
- 8.Holmes M. Randall (1994). ‘The set theoretical program of Quine succeeded (but nobody noticed)’. Modern Logic. 4: 1–47Google Scholar
- 11.Quine, W. V. O., Mathematical Logic, second edition, Harvard, 1951.Google Scholar
- 12.Rieger L. (1957). ‘A contribution to Gödel’s axiomatic set theory’. Czechoslovak Mathematical Journal 7: 323–357Google Scholar
- 13.Scott, Dana, ‘Quine’s individuals’, in E. Nagel (ed.), Logic, methodology and philosophy of science, Stanford, 1962, pp. 111–115.Google Scholar
- 14.Specker, E. P., ‘The axiom of choice in Quine’s ‘New Foundations for Mathematical Logic’ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U. S. A. 39 (1953), 972–975.Google Scholar
- 15.Wang, H., Logic, Computers, and Sets, Chelsea, 1970, pp. 406.Google Scholar