Larks comments on The role of mathematical truths - Less Wrong

14 Post author: SilasBarta 24 April 2010 04:59PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (81)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Alicorn 25 April 2010 07:52:32PM 3 points [-]

∃x∃y ( ~(x=y) & ( ∀z ( ~(z=x) ⊃ (z=y) ) & ( ~(z=y) ⊃ (z=x) ) )

Only works in a limited universe of discourse, though.

Comment author: Larks 25 April 2010 10:34:29PM *  3 points [-]

Or ∃x∃y ( ~(x=y) & ∀z ( z=y or z=x) )

Still, that's not 'twoness'. That's a sentence that's only satisfied when there are two things, and could be taken as a definition of what it means to assert that there are two things, or even as a definition of there being two such things, but it's not 'twoness'. 'Twoness' implies number is a property of objects, which I think Frege pretty conclusively disproved.