Timeline for Does the Feferman-Schutte analysis give a precise characterization of Predicative Second-Order Arithmetic?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
3 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2013 at 17:22 | comment | added | Nik Weaver | First, Friedman's "challenge" is content-free and has nothing to do with my specific criticism of Feferman-Schutte. Second, the disagreement is not about having different conceptions of predicativity. You can't just arbitrarily decide that your predicativist has the ability to apply sigma-1 comprehension at one point in your analysis, but nowhere else, after it is pointed out to you that you've implicitly assumed this. (If you allow sigma-1 comprehension in general then you get far beyond $\Gamma_0$.) | |
| Sep 26, 2013 at 12:48 | comment | added | Keshav Srinivasan | I have heard of your paper, and read various discussions of it on the FOM mailing list, for instance. Did you ever respond to Harvey Friedman's challenge? www.cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2006-April/010411.html. But in any case, my question is about how you would characterize predicativity assuming the Feferman-Schutte analysis is correct, not whether the analysis is correct. And besides, I'm not sure want "correct" really means, since predicativity is a vague enough thing that it's not clear how much of the disagreement is just attributable having different conceptions of predicativity. | |
| Sep 26, 2013 at 10:40 | history | answered | Nik Weaver | CC BY-SA 3.0 |