Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
@Timothy Chow: Oh, I thought those comments of mine were deleted/moved by you... I didn't take any action to delete them (that I'm aware of!) but something might have gone wrong when I used the mobile app. No problem. I'll delete stuff here that no longer makes sense, and I'll use the chat for potential future comments.
@user76284: I doubt my perplexity about Platonism has anything to do with technical aspects of syntax. But I won't continue the discussion inside this MO question: it was already lengthy (and perhaps a bit off topic for the site) and parts of it have been moved to chat by Timothy Chow.
@Timothy Chow: I see you didn't move to chat some of your replies to me. For readability sake, I think it'd be better if you moved to chat the whole thing (meaning: my comments inside this question and anybody's replies to me).
@user76284: Ok, as for any other sentence $\varphi$ in the language of PA, the natural language assertion "Con(ZFC) is true" translates formally to: "$\mathbb{N}\models$Con(ZFC)", which is a sentence of ZFC (assuming ZFC is our metatheory here). We will also never get a ZFC proof of that sentence. Which is in line with the fact that we don't know whether ZFC is consistent. --- But why would your example be in tension with anti-Platonism? I think I might be missing your point.
