Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T00:35:22.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Where do sets come from?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Harold T. Hodes
Harold T. Hodes*
Affiliation:
Sage School of Philosopy, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14850
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Many philosophers take set-theoretic discourse to be about objects of a special sort, namely sets; correlatively, they regard truth in such discourse as quite like truth in discourse about nonmathematical objects. There is a thin “disquotational” way of construing this construal; but that may candy-coat a philosophically substantive semantic theory: the Mathematical-Object theory of the basis for the distribution of truth and falsehood to sentences containing set-theoretic expressions. This theory asserts that truth and falsity for sentences containing set-theoretic expressions are grounded in semantic facts (about the relation between language and the world) of the sort modelled by the usual model-theoretic semantics for an uninterpreted formal first-order language. For example, it would maintain that ‘{ } ∈ {{ }}” is true in virtue of the set-theoretic fact that the empty set is a member of its singleton, and the semantic facts that ‘{ }’ designates the empty set,‘{{ }}’ designates its singleton, and ‘∈’ applies to an ordered pair of objects iff that pair's first component is a member of its second component.

Now this theory may come so naturally as to seem trivial. My purpose here is to loosen its grip by “modelling” an alternative account of the alethic underpinnings of set-theoretic discourse. According to the Alternative theory, the point of having set-theoretic expressions (‘set’ and ‘∈’ will do) in a language is not to permit its speakers to talk about some special objects under a special relation; rather it is to clothe a higher-order language in lower-order garments.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , March 1991 , pp. 150 - 175
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1991

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

[B]Burge, Tyler, Truth and singular terms, Nôus, vol. 8 (1974), pp. 309–325; reprinted in Reference, truth andreality (Mark Platts, editor), Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1980, pp. 167–181.Google Scholar
[Fo]Forster, T. E., Term models for weak set theories with a universal set, this Journal, vol. 52 (1987), pp. 374–387.Google Scholar
[Fr]Frege, Gottlob, Posthumous writings (Hermes, H.et al., editors), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1979.Google Scholar
[Fu]Furth, Montgomery, Two types of denotation, Studies in logical theory (Rescher, N., editor), American Philosophical Quarterly Monograph Series, no. 2, Blackwell, Oxford, 1968, pp. 9–45.Google Scholar
[H1]Hodes, Harold, Logicism and the ontological commitments of arithmetic, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 81 (1984), pp. 123–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[H2]Hodes, Harold, Three-valued logics: an introduction, a comparison of various logical lexica, and some philosophical remarks, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 43 (1989), pp. 99–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[H3]Hodes, Harold, Where do the natural numbers come from? Synthese, vol. 84 (1990), pp. 347–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[H4]Hodes, Harold, Ontological commitment, thick and thin, Meaning and method: essays in honor of Hilary Putnam (Boolos, George, editor), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990 (to appear).Google Scholar
[L]Levy, Azriel, Basic set theory, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[R]Russell, Bertrand, On some difficulties in the theory of transfinite numbers and order types, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, ser. 2, vol. 4 (1906), pp. 29–53; reprinted in Essays in analysis (D. Lackey, editor), Braziller, New York, 1973, pp. 135–164.Google Scholar
[W]Wang, Hao, From mathematics to philosophy, Humanities Press, New York, 1974.Google Scholar