Antireductionism and Ordinals

Mount, Beau Madison

Antireductionism and Ordinals

Dateien

Zu diesem Dokument gibt es keine Dateien.

Datum

2019

Publikationstyp

Zeitschriftenartikel

Publikationsstatus

Published

Erschienen in

Philosophia Mathematica. Oxford University Press (OUP). 2019, 27(1), pp. 105-124. ISSN 0031-8019. eISSN 1744-6406. Available under: doi: 10.1093/philmat/nky025

Zusammenfassung

I develop a novel argument against the claim that ordinals are sets. In contrast to Benacerraf’s antireductionist argument, I make no use of covert epistemic assumptions. Instead, my argument uses considerations of ontological dependence. I draw on the datum that sets depend immediately and asymmetrically on their elements and argue that this datum is incompatible with reductionism, given plausible assumptions about the dependence profile of ordinals. In addition, I show that a structurally similar argument can be made against the claim that cardinals are sets.

Fachgebiet (DDC)

100 Philosophie

Zitieren

ISO 690

MOUNT, Beau Madison, 2019. Antireductionism and Ordinals. In: Philosophia Mathematica. Oxford University Press (OUP). 2019, 27(1), pp. 105-124. ISSN 0031-8019. eISSN 1744-6406. Available under: doi: 10.1093/philmat/nky025

BibTex

@article{Mount2019Antir-52657,
  year={2019},
  doi={10.1093/philmat/nky025},
  title={Antireductionism and Ordinals},
  number={1},
  volume={27},
  issn={0031-8019},
  journal={Philosophia Mathematica},
  pages={105--124},
  author={Mount, Beau Madison}
}

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/123456789/52657">
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:creator>Mount, Beau Madison</dc:creator>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-02-01T12:04:55Z</dc:date>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:issued>2019</dcterms:issued>
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/40"/>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dcterms:title>Antireductionism and Ordinals</dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/40"/>
    <dc:contributor>Mount, Beau Madison</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-02-01T12:04:55Z</dcterms:available>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">I develop a novel argument against the claim that ordinals are sets. In contrast to Benacerraf’s antireductionist argument, I make no use of covert epistemic assumptions. Instead, my argument uses considerations of ontological dependence. I draw on the datum that sets depend immediately and asymmetrically on their elements and argue that this datum is incompatible with reductionism, given plausible assumptions about the dependence profile of ordinals. In addition, I show that a structurally similar argument can be made against the claim that cardinals are sets.</dcterms:abstract>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/52657"/>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Universitätsbibliographie

Nein

Begutachtet

Ja