Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Lévy and Solovay showed that large cardinal properties are highly malleable under forcing, suggesting they track structural roles rather than intrinsic size.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
A cardinal's cofinality and unboundedness in V are intrinsic properties that forcing cannot genuinely alter—only our access to them changes.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The absolute undefinability of large cardinals in smaller models suggests they mark genuine structural boundaries, not merely relative positions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If large cardinals tracked only structural roles, the hierarchy of consistency strength would collapse; instead it's remarkably rigid.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Forcing can create models where inaccessible cardinals become countable, showing size properties aren't intrinsic but context-dependent.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Large cardinal axioms remain consistent across diverse forcing extensions, suggesting they describe structural relationships, not absolute magnitudes.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Large cardinals characterize closure properties and definability hierarchies that persist across models, indicating they identify roles rather than sizes.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.