Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Le 12-juil.-07, à 16:27, David Nyman a écrit : > >> On 12/07/07, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> I try to avoid the words like "reflexive" or "reflection" in informal >>> talk, because it is a tricky technical terms >>> I tend to agree with what Brent said. >> Yes, I ended up more or less agreeing with him myself. But I >> nevertheless feel, from their posts, that this is *not* what some >> people have in mind when they use the term 'exists'. > > > "existence" is a very very tricky notion. In the theory I am proposing > (actually I derived it from the comp principle) the most basic notion > of "exists" is remarkably well formalize by first order arithmetical > logic, like in Ex(prime(x)): it exists a prime number.
But isn't this just an elaboration that obscures the prior assumption that numbers exist? If numbers don't exist then Ex(prime(x)) is false, or requires a different interpretation of "E". 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
