eCite Digital Repository
What is wrong with Cantor's diagonal argument?
Rush, PA and Brady, R, What is wrong with Cantor's diagonal argument?, Logique Et Analyse, 51, (1) pp. 185-219. ISSN 0024-5836 (2008) [Refereed Article]
Copyright 2008 Logique Et Analyse
We first consider the entailment logic MC, based on meaning containment, which contains neither the Law of Excluded Middle (LEM) nor the Disjunctive Syllogism (DS). We then argue that the DS may be assumed at least on a similar basis as the assumption of the LEM, which is then justified over a finite domain or for a recursive property over an infinite domain. In the latter case, use is made of Mathematical Induction. We then show that an instance of the LEM is instrumental in the proof of Cantor's Theorem, and we then argue that this is based on a more general form than can be reasonably justified. We briefly consider the impact of our approach on arithmetic and naive set theory, and compare it with intuitionist mathematics and briefly with recursive mathematics. Our "Four Basic Logical Issues" paper would provide useful background, the current paper being an application of the some of the ideas in it.
|Item Type:||Refereed Article|
|Research Division:||Philosophy and Religious Studies|
|Objective Division:||Expanding Knowledge|
|Objective Group:||Expanding knowledge|
|Objective Field:||Expanding knowledge in philosophy and religious studies|
|UTAS Author:||Rush, PA (Dr Penelope Rush)|
|Downloads:||293 View Download Statistics|
Repository Staff Only: item control page