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 There is an intrinsic connection between Gentzen's ordinal assignment to deductions in PA and the standard ordinal assignment to infinite deductions in PA_ω
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
The connection Buchholz establishes is a technical correspondence, not an intrinsic metaphysical relationship between distinct proof-theoretic frameworks.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Intrinsicness requires that the connection hold in virtue of the nature of the objects themselves, but ordinal assignments are conventional choices within formal systems.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Gentzen's ordinals are assigned to finite syntactic objects while PA_ω ordinals are assigned to infinite trees, making them objects of fundamentally different ontological categories.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A correspondence between entities of different ontological categories can at most be extrinsic and representational, as Kreisel's work on informal rigor suggests proof-theoretic notions must be grounded in their specific domains.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Gentzen's method assigned ordinals to purported proofs of the empty sequent
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The infinitary approach assigns ordinals to infinite deductions in PA_ω
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Later work by Buchholz (1997) and others revealed that these two assignment methods are intrinsically connected
?
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.