Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > Peter Jones writes (quoting Bruno Marchal): > > >>>Frankly I don't think so. Set platonism can be considered as a bold >>>assumption, but number platonism, as I said you need a sophisticated >>>form of finitism to doubt it. I recall it is just the belief that the >>>propositions of elementary arithmetic are independent of you. >> >>Arithemtical Platonism is the belief that mathematical >>structures *exist* independently of you, >>not just that they are true independently of you. > > > What's the difference? > > Stathis Papaioannou
You could regard the theorems of arithmetic as just being relative to Peano's axioms: "1+1=2 assuming Peano" Somewhat as Bruno presents his theorems as relative to the "axiom" of COMP. Brent Meeker --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
