{"title":"The Logic of Potential Infinity","authors":"Roy T Cook","doi":"10.1093/philmat/nkae022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Michael Dummett argues that acceptance of potentially infinite collections requires that we abandon classical logic and restrict ourselves to intuitionistic logic. In this paper we examine whether Dummett is correct. After developing two detailed accounts of what, exactly, it means for a concept to be potentially infinite (based on ideas due to Charles McCarty and Øystein Linnebo, respectively), we construct a Kripke structure that contains a natural number structure that satisfies both accounts. This model supports a logic much stronger than intuitionistic logic, demonstrating that Dummett was wrong. We conclude by briefly examining ways to extend the account(s) in question to indefinitely extensible concepts such as Cardinal, Ordinal, and Set.","PeriodicalId":49004,"journal":{"name":"Philosophia Mathematica","volume":"116 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophia Mathematica","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/philmat/nkae022","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Michael Dummett argues that acceptance of potentially infinite collections requires that we abandon classical logic and restrict ourselves to intuitionistic logic. In this paper we examine whether Dummett is correct. After developing two detailed accounts of what, exactly, it means for a concept to be potentially infinite (based on ideas due to Charles McCarty and Øystein Linnebo, respectively), we construct a Kripke structure that contains a natural number structure that satisfies both accounts. This model supports a logic much stronger than intuitionistic logic, demonstrating that Dummett was wrong. We conclude by briefly examining ways to extend the account(s) in question to indefinitely extensible concepts such as Cardinal, Ordinal, and Set.
Michael Dummett认为,接受潜在的无限集合要求我们放弃经典逻辑,并将自己限制在直觉逻辑中。本文将检验达米特的观点是否正确。在发展了两个详细的描述之后,确切地说,一个概念是潜在无限的意思(分别基于查尔斯·麦卡蒂和Øystein Linnebo的想法),我们构建了一个Kripke结构,它包含一个满足两种解释的自然数结构。这个模型支持的逻辑比直觉逻辑强得多,证明达米特错了。最后,我们简要地考察了将所讨论的帐户扩展到无限可扩展的概念(如基数、序数和集合)的方法。
期刊介绍:
Philosophia Mathematica is the only journal in the world devoted specifically to philosophy of mathematics. The journal publishes peer-reviewed new work in philosophy of mathematics, the application of mathematics, and computing. In addition to main articles, sometimes grouped on a single theme, there are shorter discussion notes, letters, and book reviews. The journal is published online-only, with three issues published per year.