Mathematical Aphorisms. Part 6.

It seems underemphasized that the parsimony of ZFC in the way of ‘types’ (having only one sort called sets) has the following practical and notational virtue: you can get by with a single type of the quantifier \exists, and a single type of the quantifier \forall; multi-sorted formalisms need multiple sorts for each of \exists and \forall, respectively. Why? Because otherwise the semantics do not work. (You can find a suitable example for yourself.)

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Category Theory, expository, logic, Olds, Research. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s