Publikation: Richness and Reflection
Lade...
Dateien
Zu diesem Dokument gibt es keine Dateien.
Datum
2016
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Sammlungen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Zeitschriftenartikel
Publikationsstatus
Published
Erschienen in
Philosophia Mathematica. Oxford University Press (OUP). 2016, 24(3), pp. 330-359. ISSN 0031-8019. eISSN 1744-6406. Available under: doi: 10.1093/philmat/nkv036
Zusammenfassung
A pervasive thought in contemporary philosophy of mathematics is that in order to justify reflection principles, one must hold universism: the view that there is a single universe of pure sets. I challenge this kind of reasoning by contrasting universism with a Zermelian form of multiversism. I argue that if extant justifications of reflection principles using notions of richness are acceptable for the universist, then the Zermelian can use similar justifications. However, I note that for some forms of richness argument, the status of reflection principles as axioms is left open for the Zermelian.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
100 Philosophie
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined
Zitieren
ISO 690
BARTON, Neil, 2016. Richness and Reflection. In: Philosophia Mathematica. Oxford University Press (OUP). 2016, 24(3), pp. 330-359. ISSN 0031-8019. eISSN 1744-6406. Available under: doi: 10.1093/philmat/nkv036BibTex
@article{Barton2016Richn-52677, year={2016}, doi={10.1093/philmat/nkv036}, title={Richness and Reflection}, number={3}, volume={24}, issn={0031-8019}, journal={Philosophia Mathematica}, pages={330--359}, author={Barton, Neil} }
RDF
<rdf:RDF xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/52677"> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <dc:contributor>Barton, Neil</dc:contributor> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/40"/> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-02-02T14:18:02Z</dcterms:available> <dcterms:title>Richness and Reflection</dcterms:title> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/40"/> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-02-02T14:18:02Z</dc:date> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">A pervasive thought in contemporary philosophy of mathematics is that in order to justify reflection principles, one must hold universism: the view that there is a single universe of pure sets. I challenge this kind of reasoning by contrasting universism with a Zermelian form of multiversism. I argue that if extant justifications of reflection principles using notions of richness are acceptable for the universist, then the Zermelian can use similar justifications. However, I note that for some forms of richness argument, the status of reflection principles as axioms is left open for the Zermelian.</dcterms:abstract> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/> <dcterms:issued>2016</dcterms:issued> <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights> <dc:creator>Barton, Neil</dc:creator> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/52677"/> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>
Interner Vermerk
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation
Finanzierungsart
Kommentar zur Publikation
Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Nein
Begutachtet
Ja