Section 1 is devoted to the study of countable recursively saturated models with an automorphism moving every non-algebraic point. We show that every countable theory has such a model and exhibit necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of automorphisms moving all non-algebraic points. Furthermore we show that there are many complete theories with the property that every countable recursively saturated model has such an automorphism. In Section 2 we apply our main theorem from Section 1 to models of Quine's (...) set theory New Foundations (NF) to answer an old consistency question. If NF is consistent, then it has a model in which the standard natural numbers are a definable subclass N of the model's set of internal natural numbers Nn. In addition, in this model the class of wellfounded sets is exactly $\bigcup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\mathscr{P}^n(\varnothing)$. (shrink)

Section 1 is devoted to the study of countable recursively saturated models with an automorphism moving every non-algebraic point. We show that every countable theory has such a model and exhibit necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of automorphisms moving all non-algebraic points. Furthermore we show that there are many complete theories with the property that every countable recursively saturated model has such an automorphism.In Section 2 we apply our main theorem from Section 1 to models of Quine's set (...) theory New Foundations (NF) to answer an old consistency question. If NF is consistent, then it has a model in which the standard natural numbers are a definable subclass ℕ of the model's set of internal natural numbers Nn. In addition, in this model the class of wellfounded sets is exactly. (shrink)

This paper discusses a sequence of extensions ofNFU, Jensen's improvement of Quine's set theory “New Foundations” (NF) of [16].The original theoryNFof Quine continues to present difficulties. After 60 years of intermittent investigation, it is still not known to be consistent relative to any set theory in which we have confidence. Specker showed in [20] thatNFdisproves Choice (and so proves Infinity). Even if one assumes the consistency ofNF, one is hampered by the lack of powerful methods for proofs of consistency and (...) independence such as are available for use withZFC; very clever work has been done with permutation methods, starting with [18] and [5], and exemplified more recently by [14], but permutation methods can only be applied to show the consistency or independence of unstratified sentences (see the definition ofNFUbelow for a definition of stratification). For example, there is no method available to determine whether the assertion “the continuum can be well-ordered” is consistent with or independent ofNF. There is one substantial independence result for an assertion with nontrivial stratified consequences, using metamathematical methods: this is Orey's proof of the independence of the Axiom of Counting fromNF(see below for a statement of this axiom).We mention these difficulties only to reassure the reader of their irrelevance to the present work. Jensen's modification of “New Foundations” (in [13]), which was to restrict extensionality to sets, allowing many non-sets (urelements) with no elements, has almost magical effects. (shrink)

This paper discusses a sequence of extensions ofNFU, Jensen's improvement of Quine's set theory “New Foundations” (NF) of [16].The original theoryNFof Quine continues to present difficulties. After 60 years of intermittent investigation, it is still not known to be consistent relative to any set theory in which we have confidence. Specker showed in [20] thatNFdisproves Choice (and so proves Infinity). Even if one assumes the consistency ofNF, one is hampered by the lack of powerful methods for proofs of consistency and (...) independence such as are available for use withZFC; very clever work has been done with permutation methods, starting with [18] and [5], and exemplified more recently by [14], but permutation methods can only be applied to show the consistency or independence of unstratified sentences (see the definition ofNFUbelow for a definition of stratification). For example, there is no method available to determine whether the assertion “the continuum can be well-ordered” is consistent with or independent ofNF. There is one substantial independence result for an assertion with nontrivial stratified consequences, using metamathematical methods: this is Orey's proof of the independence of the Axiom of Counting fromNF(see below for a statement of this axiom).We mention these difficulties only to reassure the reader of their irrelevance to the present work. Jensen's modification of “New Foundations” (in [13]), which was to restrict extensionality to sets, allowing many non-sets (urelements) with no elements, has almost magical effects. (shrink)

Let us define the intuitionistic part of a classical theory T as the intuitionistic theory whose proper axioms are identical with the proper axioms of T. For example, Heyting arithmetic HA is the intuitionistic part of classical Peano arithmetic PA. It's a well-known fact, proved by Heyting and Myhill, that ZF is identical with its intuitionistic part. In this paper, we mainly prove that TT, Russell's Simple Theory of Types, and NF, Quine's "New Foundations," are not equal to their intuitionistic (...) part. So, an intuitionistic version of TT or NF seems more naturally definable than an intuitionistic version of ZF. In the first section, we present a simple technique to build Kripke models of the intuitionistic part of TT (with short examples showing bad properties of finite sets if they are defined in the usual classical way). In the remaining sections, we show how models of intuitionistic NF 2 and NF can be obtained from well-chosen classical ones. In these models, the excluded middle will not be satisfied for some non-stratified sentences. (shrink)