Foundations without Sets

American Philosophical Quarterly 18 (4):347 - 353 (1981)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
The dominant school of logic, semantics, and the foundation of mathematics construct its theories within the framework of set theory. There are three strategies by means of which a member of this school might attempt to justify his ontology of sets. One strategy is to show that sets are already included in the naturalistic part of our everyday ontology. If they are, then one may assume that whatever justifies the everyday ontology justifies the ontology of sets. Another strategy is to show that set theory is already part of logic. In this case, the ontology of sets would be justified in the sam way logic is justified. The third strategy is to show that set theory plays some unique role in theoretical work. If it does, then its ontology would be justified pragmatically. In this paper it is shown that none of these strategies is successful. One properly constructs foundations, not within set theory. bit within an intensional logic that takes properties, relations, propositions as basic.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-12-19
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
The Semantic Conception of Truth and the Foundations of Semantics.Tarski, Alfred; Lewis, C. I. & Goodman, Nelson

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
180 ( #21,967 of 47,380 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
17 ( #36,440 of 47,380 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.