Re: Set Theory: Should You Believe

The institutionalization of research
produced many professionals who had no option but to churn out one
paper after another in the mainstream research areas, with virtually
zero support for any significant pursuit of alternative foundations.
All I can say is that this is just plain wrong. Whoever it was that
decided the funding priorities over the last several decades (ever
since the early 1900's) should have had the vision to support and
encourage alternative viewpoints that may have flatly contradicted the
status quo. Why can't these dissenters co-exist with the mainstream
guys and get funding?

They *do* get the same funding as mainstream set theorists, i.e. nothing.

Are you under the impression that set theory was like the space programme,
with the US and the Soviets vying for the strongest large cardinal axiom?

============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ==============
Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Set Theory: Should You Believe
    ... paper after another in the mainstream research areas, ... decided the funding priorities over the last several decades (ever ... Why can't these dissenters co-exist with the mainstream ... They *do* get the same funding as mainstream set theorists, ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Set Theory: Should You Believe
    ... decided the funding priorities over the last several decades (ever ... Why can't these dissenters co-exist with the mainstream ... Set theory is a business, ...
    (sci.logic)
Quantcast