We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The chapter introduces the iterative conception, according to which every set appears at one level or another of the mathematical structure known as the cumulative hierarchy, as well as theories based on the conception. The chapter presents various accounts of the iterative conception: the constructivist account, the dependency account and my own minimalist account. It is argued that the minimalist account is to be preferred to the others. A method – which I call inference to the best conception – is then described to defend the correctness of the iterative conception so understood. This method requires one to show that the iterative conception fares better than other conceptions with respect to a number of desiderata on conceptions of set. This provides additional motivation for exploring alternative conceptions of set in the remainder of the book.
In ZFC, the class Ord of ordinals is easily seen to satisfy the definable version of strong inaccessibility. Here we explore deeper ZFC-verifiable combinatorial properties of Ord, as indicated in Theorems A & B below. Note that Theorem A shows the unexpected result that Ord is never definably weakly compact in any model of ZFC.
Theorem A. Let${\cal M}$be any model of ZFC.
(1)The definable tree property fails in${\cal M}$: There is an${\cal M}$-definable Ord-tree with no${\cal M}$-definable cofinal branch.
(2)The definable partition property fails in${\cal M}$: There is an${\cal M}$-definable 2-coloring$f:{[X]^2} \to 2$for some${\cal M}$-definable proper class X such that no${\cal M}$-definable proper classs is monochromatic for f.
(3)The definable compactness property for${{\cal L}_{\infty ,\omega }}$fails in${\cal M}$: There is a definable theory${\rm{\Gamma }}$in the logic${{\cal L}_{\infty ,\omega }}$(in the sense of${\cal M}$) of size Ord such that every set-sized subtheory of${\rm{\Gamma }}$is satisfiable in${\cal M}$, but there is no${\cal M}$-definable model of${\rm{\Gamma }}$.
Theorem B. The definable ⋄Ordprinciple holds in a model${\cal M}$of ZFC iff${\cal M}$carries an${\cal M}$-definable global well-ordering.
Theorems A and B above can be recast as theorem schemes in ZFC, or as asserting that a single statement in the language of class theory holds in all ‘spartan’ models of GB (Gödel-Bernays class theory); where a spartan model of GB is any structure of the form $\left( {{\cal M},{D_{\cal M}}} \right)$, where ${\cal M} \models {\rm{ZF}}$ and ${D_{\cal M}}$ is the family of${\cal M}$-definable classes. Theorem C gauges the complexity of the collection GBspa of (Gödel-numbers of) sentences that hold in all spartan models of GB.
Theorem C. GBspais${\rm{\Pi }}_1^1$-complete.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.