罗素,泽梅洛和达米特

J. Studd
{"title":"罗素,泽梅洛和达米特","authors":"J. Studd","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198719649.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Concerns about generality in the context of set theory are not new. Russell seeks to resolve the set-theoretic antinomies by maintaining that we cannot legitimately speak of ‘all classes’. Zermelo attempts to avoid the paradoxes without ‘constriction and mutilation’ by adopting an open-ended conception of the cumulative hierarchy of sets. Dummett takes the indefinite extensibility of concepts such as set and ordinal to impugn absolutism about quantifiers. But not every paradox-inspired argument is an argument for relativism about quantifiers. This chapter aims to fill in the logical and philosophical background to the contemporary absolute generality debate, with an eye to disentangling my favoured indefinite-extensibility-based argument from others in its vicinity.","PeriodicalId":272038,"journal":{"name":"Everything, more or less","volume":"80 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Russell, Zermelo, and Dummett\",\"authors\":\"J. Studd\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OSO/9780198719649.003.0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Concerns about generality in the context of set theory are not new. Russell seeks to resolve the set-theoretic antinomies by maintaining that we cannot legitimately speak of ‘all classes’. Zermelo attempts to avoid the paradoxes without ‘constriction and mutilation’ by adopting an open-ended conception of the cumulative hierarchy of sets. Dummett takes the indefinite extensibility of concepts such as set and ordinal to impugn absolutism about quantifiers. But not every paradox-inspired argument is an argument for relativism about quantifiers. This chapter aims to fill in the logical and philosophical background to the contemporary absolute generality debate, with an eye to disentangling my favoured indefinite-extensibility-based argument from others in its vicinity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":272038,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Everything, more or less\",\"volume\":\"80 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Everything, more or less\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198719649.003.0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Everything, more or less","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198719649.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在集合论的背景下对普遍性的关注并不是什么新鲜事。罗素试图通过坚持我们不能合法地谈论“所有阶级”来解决集合论的二律反。Zermelo试图通过采用集合的累积层次的开放式概念来避免悖论而不“限制和破坏”。Dummett以集合和序数等概念的无限可拓性来质疑量词的绝对主义。但并不是每一个悖论启发的论证都是关于量词的相对主义论证。本章旨在填补当代绝对普遍性辩论的逻辑和哲学背景,着眼于将我所喜欢的基于不确定可扩展性的论点与其他相关论点分开。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Russell, Zermelo, and Dummett
Concerns about generality in the context of set theory are not new. Russell seeks to resolve the set-theoretic antinomies by maintaining that we cannot legitimately speak of ‘all classes’. Zermelo attempts to avoid the paradoxes without ‘constriction and mutilation’ by adopting an open-ended conception of the cumulative hierarchy of sets. Dummett takes the indefinite extensibility of concepts such as set and ordinal to impugn absolutism about quantifiers. But not every paradox-inspired argument is an argument for relativism about quantifiers. This chapter aims to fill in the logical and philosophical background to the contemporary absolute generality debate, with an eye to disentangling my favoured indefinite-extensibility-based argument from others in its vicinity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信