home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.logic
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!nasser.eecs.nwu.edu!ian
- From: ian@nasser.eecs.nwu.edu (Ian Sutherland)
- Subject: Re: Lowneheim-Skolem theorem
- Message-ID: <1992Nov23.223655.2981@eecs.nwu.edu>
- Sender: usenet@eecs.nwu.edu (Mr. Usenet)
- Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
- References: <1992Nov17.124233.24312@oracorp.com> <1992Nov20.140159.4770@
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 22:36:55 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <367@mtnmath.UUCP> paul@mtnmath.UUCP (Paul Budnik) writes:
- >In article <1992Nov20.140159.4770@sun0.urz.uni-heidelberg.de>, gsmith@l
- auren.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de (Gene W. Smith) writes:
- >> "Uncountable" means no one-to-one relation with the integers
- >> can be given. This does not refer to a formal system.
- >
- >Unless you have a formal system in which to determine what constitutes
- >a one-to-one relationship you are not doing mathematics.
-
- If this is so Mr. Budnik, then what do you call the activities of all
- those people in math departments all over the world who don't even know
- the STATEMENT of the Lowenheim-Skolem theorem? I.e., probably most
- working mathematicians who are not logicians? You may call it
- "philosophy", but the rest of the world calls it "mathematics". The
- people that do this "mathematics" which you insist is "philosophy"
- don't look at formal systems to tell them what constitutes a one-one
- relationship. You can say that they're operating without foundations
- (they'd probably be glad to agree!), or you can say they're just a
- bunch of Platonists, but it is an abuse of language to insist that
- they're doing "philosophy".
- --
- Ian Sutherland
- ian@eecs.nwu.edu
-
- Sans Peur
-