Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Treating decidable mathematical sentences as neither true... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Formalist positions of Goodman and Quine's persuasion are refuted by reductio ad absurdum

    Treating decidable mathematical sentences as neither true nor false would require abandoning mathematics as currently practiced

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language3 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    A consequence that destroys current mathematical practice constitutes a reductio...Formalist positions of Goodman and Quine's persuasion are refuted by reductio ad...There exist sentences (such as the Fermat-like primality claim) that are decidab...Under Goodman and Quine's formalism, a sentence is true or false only if a concr...
    +1 moreShow less
    Under Goodman and Quine's formalism, such sentences would be neither true nor fa...

    Similar

    The most natural explanation of this distinction is that correct mathe...83%There are countless mathematical sentences for which no concrete proof...83%Fictionalists are committed to holding that all mathematical sentences...82%We have good reasons to think that mathematical sentences are true, an...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: formalism-mathematics
    View source passageHide passage
    (That is—with ‘2^\(n\)’ representing ‘2 to the power \(n\)’—‘[2^(2^(2^(2^(2^2))))]\(+1\) is prime’; cf. Tennant, 1997 p. 152.) They cannot deny the sentence exists, for there is the token before our very eyes. But there are strong grounds for thinking that no concrete proof or disproof will exist, for the only methods available may use up more time, space and material than any human could have at her disposal, perhaps than actually exists. There are countless sentences with this property: concre

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective