{"title":"Sets, Set Sizes, and Infinity in Badiou's Being and Event","authors":"T. Tho","doi":"10.3986/FV.41.2.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper argues that Cantorian transfinite cardinality is not a necessary assumption for the ontological claims in Badiou’s L’Être et l’Événement (Vol. 1). The necessary structure for Badiou’s mathematical ontology in this work was only the ordinality of sets. The method for reckoning the sizes of sets was only assumed to follow the standard Cantorian measure. In the face of different and compelling forms of measuring non-finite sets (following Benci and Di Nasso, and Mancosu), it is argued that Badiou’s project can indeed accommodate this pluralism of measurement. In turn, this plurality of measurement implies that Badiou’s insistence on the “subtraction of the one”, the move to affirm the unconditioned being of the “inconsistent multiple”, results in the virtuality of the one, a pluralism of counting that further complicates the relationship between the one and the multiple in the post-Cantorian era.","PeriodicalId":41584,"journal":{"name":"FILOZOFSKI VESTNIK","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FILOZOFSKI VESTNIK","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3986/FV.41.2.07","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper argues that Cantorian transfinite cardinality is not a necessary assumption for the ontological claims in Badiou’s L’Être et l’Événement (Vol. 1). The necessary structure for Badiou’s mathematical ontology in this work was only the ordinality of sets. The method for reckoning the sizes of sets was only assumed to follow the standard Cantorian measure. In the face of different and compelling forms of measuring non-finite sets (following Benci and Di Nasso, and Mancosu), it is argued that Badiou’s project can indeed accommodate this pluralism of measurement. In turn, this plurality of measurement implies that Badiou’s insistence on the “subtraction of the one”, the move to affirm the unconditioned being of the “inconsistent multiple”, results in the virtuality of the one, a pluralism of counting that further complicates the relationship between the one and the multiple in the post-Cantorian era.
本文认为,Cantorian超限基数不是Badiou的《L’specified tre et L’Événement》(Vol.1)中本体论主张的必要假设。Badiou数学本体论在这部作品中的必要结构只是集合的平凡性。计算集合大小的方法只被假设为遵循标准的康托度量。面对不同且引人注目的测量非有限集的形式(继Benci和Di Nasso以及Mancosu之后),有人认为Badiou的项目确实可以适应这种测量的多元化。反过来,这种测量的多元性意味着Badiou对“一的减法”的坚持,即对“不一致的多元性”的无条件存在的肯定,导致了一的虚拟性,一种计数的多元性,使后康托尔时代的一和多元之间的关系进一步复杂化。