Recentemente publicado na Logica Universalis

A Non-Standard Analysis of a Cultural Icon: The Case of Paul Halmos
Piotr Blaszczyk et al.

Abstract:
We examine Paul Halmos’ comments on category theory, Dedekind cuts, devil
worship, logic, and Robinson’s infinitesimals. Halmos’ scepticism about
category theory derives from his philosophical position of naive
set-theoretic realism. In the words of an MAA biography, Halmos thought
that mathematics is “certainty” and “architecture” yet 20th century logic
teaches us is that mathematics is full of uncertainty or more precisely
incompleteness. If the term architecture meant to imply that mathematics is
one great solid castle, then modern logic tends to teach us the opposite
lesson, namely that the castle is floating in midair. Halmos’ realism tends
to color his judgment of purely scientific aspects of logic and the way it
is practiced and applied. He often expressed distaste for nonstandard
models, and made a sustained effort to eliminate first-order logic, the
logicians’ concept of interpretation, and the syntactic vs semantic
distinction. He felt that these were vague, and sought to replace them all
by his polyadic algebra. Halmos claimed that Robinson’s framework is
“unnecessary” but Henson and Keisler argue that Robinson’s framework allows
one to dig deeper into set-theoretic resources than is common in
Archimedean mathematics. This can potentially prove theorems not accessible
by standard methods, undermining Halmos’ criticisms.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11787-016-0153-0

-- 
Você está recebendo esta mensagem porque se inscreveu no grupo "LOGICA-L" dos 
Grupos do Google.
Para cancelar inscrição nesse grupo e parar de receber e-mails dele, envie um 
e-mail para [email protected].
Para postar neste grupo, envie um e-mail para [email protected].
Visite este grupo em https://groups.google.com/a/dimap.ufrn.br/group/logica-l/.
Para ver esta discussão na web, acesse 
https://groups.google.com/a/dimap.ufrn.br/d/msgid/logica-l/CAF2zFLCWCgmUtTeCqHWdnwuekW%3D5R%2BYuh0tTcn8f4i7oSeJsiw%40mail.gmail.com.

Responder a