Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox

Chris
> You seem to be getting off track here. The "paradox" has to do with the
> fact that S can be *true* in models that are in fact countable, not that
> it's true in some models and false in others.

Didn't I say exactly that? I said in the post you quoted that Moore's
predicament is NOT that some statement is true in one model and false
in another. But nor is it simply that S can be *true* in models that
are in fact countable. It is, as you say, that the thesis of
relativism about cardinality is either unintelligible or false.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Zenkins paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)
    ... :>: It is obvious what cardinality means, and it is not a definite thing, ... :>: paradox this is your problem. ... : completely freely in mathematics. ... idea of size and infinity this seems intuitive. ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Zenkins paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)
    ... :>: It is obvious what cardinality means, and it is not a definite thing, ... :>: paradox this is your problem. ... : completely freely in mathematics. ... idea of size and infinity this seems intuitive. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Why is the Russell Paradox necessary?
    ... the Russell Paradox method is necessary. ... given set is greater than the cardinality of the given set. ... But if we assume the existence of a set of all sets, ... Russell studied that proof, and *simplified* it to the one-line ...
    (sci.math)
  • Why is the Russell Paradox necessary?
    ... in which Russell's Paradox is used ... leads to that paradox, ie. a contradiction, I wonder why ... given set is greater than the cardinality of the given set. ... But if we assume the existence of a set of all sets, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Zenkins paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)
    ... :> In sci.math Eray Ozkural exa wrote: ... :>:>: We use the concept of bijection to reason about the equivalence of the ... Two sets have the same cardinality ... paradox this is your problem. ...
    (comp.theory)