Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2024
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.05914 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866915053515571200 |
|---|---|
| author | Ju, Daheng Jing, Qihang |
| author_facet | Ju, Daheng Jing, Qihang |
| contents | In non-well-founded set theory, which anti-foundation axiom is philosophically justified, BAFA, FAFA, SAFA, AFA, or some other? In this paper, we investigate a general approach to answering this question: first, consider which identity condition for sets is justified; second, consider which anti-foundation axiom it justifies. Specifically, we study in detail two plausible identity conditions. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2412_05914 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Comparing Anti-foundation Axioms by Comparing Identity Conditions for Sets Ju, Daheng Jing, Qihang Logic In non-well-founded set theory, which anti-foundation axiom is philosophically justified, BAFA, FAFA, SAFA, AFA, or some other? In this paper, we investigate a general approach to answering this question: first, consider which identity condition for sets is justified; second, consider which anti-foundation axiom it justifies. Specifically, we study in detail two plausible identity conditions. |
| title | Comparing Anti-foundation Axioms by Comparing Identity Conditions for Sets |
| topic | Logic |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.05914 |