Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T19:01:45.082Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Axioms for the set-theoretic hierarchy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

James van Aken
James van Aken*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The axioms for Zermelo-Fraenkel (ZF) set theory are an appealing but somewhat arbitrary-seeming assortment. A survey of the axioms does not suffice to reveal the source of their attraction. Accordingly, attempts have been made to ground ZF in principles whose appeal can be felt immediately. These attempts can be classified as follows. First, some of them propose to rest the ZF axioms directly on informal doctrine. The others propose to ground the ZF axioms in other formal axioms that can be regarded as more basic. When the latter approach is taken, ZF continues to draw on informal support, but the draft is made at a more basic level.

The same research can be classified in another way, according to the informal diagnosis offered for the paradoxes of set theory. In some cases, the diagnosis is that the paradoxical sets (such as the Russell set) fail to exist only because they would have to be too large; a set that would be sufficiently small must always exist. This is the doctrine of limitation of size. In other cases, the diagnosis is that the paradoxical sets fail to exist only because they would have to lie too high in a certain hierarchy of sets; a set that would lie sufficiently low in the hierarchy must always exist. This is the doctrine of the hierarchy. The present paper will investigate the latter doctrine, with the doctrine of size making a brief appearance at the end.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 51 , Issue 4 , December 1986 , pp. 992 - 1004
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1986

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

Boolos, G. [1971], The iterative concept of set, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 68, pp. 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drake, F. [1974], Set theory, North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Fraenkel, A. A., Bar-Hillel, Y. and Lévy, A. [1973], Foundations of set theory, North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Friedman, H. [1971], Higher set theory and mathematical practice, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 2, pp. 326–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gödel, K. [1964], What is Cantor's continuum problem?Philosophy of mathematics (Benacerraf, P. and Putnam, H., editors), Prentice-Hall, Englewoord Cliffs, New Jersey, pp. 258–273.Google Scholar
Kreisel, G. [1965], Mathematical logic, Lectures on modern mathematics (Saaty, T., editor), vol. 3, Wiley, New York, pp. 95–195.Google Scholar
Martin, D. A. [1974], Borel determinacy, Annals of Mathematics, ser. 2, vol. 102, pp. 363–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montague, R. [1965], Set theory and higher-order logic, Formal systems and recursive functions (Crossley, J. and Dummett, M. A. E., editors), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 131–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhardt, W. N. [1974], Remarks on reflection principles, large cardinals, and elementary embeddings, Axiomatic set theory (Jech, T., editor), Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 13, part 2, American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, pp. 189–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, D. [1974], Axiomatizing set theory, Axiomatic set theory (Jech, T., editor), Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 13, part 2, American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, pp. 207–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shoenfield, J. R. [1967], Mathematical logic, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Shoenfield, J. R. [1977], Axioms of set theory, Handbook of mathematical logic (Barwise, J., editor), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 321–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Aken, J. [1982], Intuitive pictures of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory, Ph.D. Thesis, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar