RELATIVE CATEGORICITY AND ABSTRACTION PRINCIPLES
From MaRDI portal
Abstract: Many recent writers in the philosophy of mathematics have put great weight on the relative categoricity of the traditional axiomatizations of our foundational theories of arithmetic and set theory (cite{Parsons1990a}, cite{Parsons2008} S{49}, cite{McGee1997aa}, cite{Lavine1999aa}, cite{Vaananen2014aa}). Another great enterprise in contemporary philosophy of mathematics has been Wright's and Hale's project of founding mathematics on abstraction principles (cite{Hale2001}, cite{Cook2007aa}). In cite{Walsh2012aa}, it was noted that one traditional abstraction principle, namely Hume's Principle, had a certain relative categoricity property, which here we term emph{natural relative categoricity}. In this paper, we show that most other abstraction principles are emph{not} naturally relatively categorical, so that there is in fact a large amount of incompatibility between these two recent trends in contemporary philosophy of mathematics. To better understand the precise demands of relative categoricity in the context of abstraction principles, we compare and contrast these constraints to (i) stability-like acceptability criteria on abstraction principles (cf. cite{Cook2012aa}), (ii) the Tarski-Sher logicality requirements on abstraction principles studied by Antonelli cite{Antonelli2010aa} and Fine~cite{Fine2002}, and (iii) supervaluational ideas coming out of Hodes' work cite{Hodes1984, Hodes1990aa, Hodes1991}.
Recommendations
- Abstractionist categories of categories
- Abstraction principles and the classification of second-order equivalence relations
- Relativizing computable categoricity
- Categoricity and universal classes
- Amalgamation, absoluteness, and categoricity
- Abstract categorical logic
- Extensivity of categories of relational structures
- On absoluteness of categoricity in abstract elementary classes
- Categorical properties of logical frameworks
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3875278
Cites work
- A mathematical introduction to logic.
- Comparing Peano arithmetic, Basic Law V, and Hume's Principle
- Conservativeness, Stability, and Abstraction
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3829861 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1183730 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 50939 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1226875 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1314876 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 2168553 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1868658 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 824731 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 2212008 (Why is no real title available?)
- Is Hume's principle analytic?
- Logicism, interpretability, and knowledge of arithmetic
- Mathematical thought and its objects
- Model Theory
- New V, ZF and Abstraction†
- Notions of invariance for abstraction principles
- Numerical abstraction via the Frege quantifier
- On The Consistency of Second-Order Contextual Definitions
- The bounds of logic. A generalized viewpoint
- Well- and non-well-founded Fregean extensions
- What are logical notions?
- Where do sets come from?
- Where do the natural numbers come from?
Cited in
(7)- Abstraction principles and the classification of second-order equivalence relations
- Asymptotic quasi-completeness and ZFC
- What Russell should have said to Burali-Forti
- Categories for the neologicist
- Can the cumulative hierarchy be categorically characterized?
- Identity and the cognitive value of logical equations in Frege's foundational project
- Is Hume’s Principle analytic?
This page was built for publication: RELATIVE CATEGORICITY AND ABSTRACTION PRINCIPLES
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q3195592)
