Skip to primary content
Skip to secondary content

Joel David Hamkins

mathematics and philosophy of the infinite

Joel David Hamkins

Main menu

  • Home
    • About
    • My Curriculum Vita
    • Contact
    • Comment Board
  • Publications
    • Publication list
    • Recent publications
    • Publications by topic
      • Automorphism towers
      • Infinitary computability
      • Infinitary utilitarianism
      • Large cardinals
    • My Research Collaborators
  • Talks
    • Talks
    • Recent and Upcoming Talks
    • Videos
  • Appointments and Grants
    • About Me
    • My Academic Appointments
    • Grants and Awards
  • Teaching
    • About My Courses
  • Students
    • About My Graduate Students
    • List of My Graduate Students
  • Mathematical Shorts
  • Math for Kids

Tag Archives: The Church of Logic

The Church of Logic podcast, April 2025

Posted on April 21, 2025 by Joel David Hamkins
Reply

I was interviewed by Cody Roux for The Church of Logic podcast—a fascinating sweeping conversation on issues in the philosophy of mathematics and set theory, including what I described as a fundamental dichotomy between two perspectives on the nature of mathematics and what it is all about. Cody and I have affinities with opposite sides of this dichotomy, which made for a fruitful exchange.

Share:

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • More
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Pocket
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
Posted in Talks, Videos | Tagged Cody Roux, philosophy of logic, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of set theory, podcast, The Church of Logic | Leave a reply

Infinitely More

Buy Me a Coffee

Proof and the Art of Mathematics, MIT Press, 2020

Recent Comments

  • Mohammad Golshani on Lectures on Set Theory, Beijing, June 2025
  • Joel David Hamkins on Skolem’s paradox and the countable transitive submodel theorem, Leeds Set Theory Seminar, May 2025
  • Thomas on Alan Turing, On computable numbers
  • Mohandeep Singh on Comment Board
  • Joel David Hamkins on Comment Board

Buy me a Coffee

JDH on Twitter

My Tweets

RSS Mathoverflow activity

  • Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Does every dense down-set in P(ω)/(fin) contain a partition?
    It is not a cBa, since no countably infinite antichain has a supremum, since by Hausdorff's method you can squeeze another set below any candidate. Every (ω,ω) gap is filled.
  • Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Does every dense down-set in P(ω)/(fin) contain a partition?
    This won't imply DC, since one can have AC for all sets at this level, and a violation of DC only very high up in the set-theoretic universe.
  • Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Extracting partitions from dense open subsets of complete Boolean algebras without choice
    Conceivably it is easier to find antichains and partitions in complete Boolean algebras than in partial orders. For example, every antichain in a cBa extends to a partition by taking the complement of the supremum. Do we know the question for partial orders is equivalent to the question for complete Boolean algebras?
  • Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Extracting partitions from dense open subsets of complete Boolean algebras without choice
    Calliope, you don't just want to say D≠{0}, but rather require a,b≠0 in your definition of density.
  • Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Ordinary mathematics intrinsically requiring unbounded replacement/specification?
    @user21820 I believe Caleb's point is that precisely because every Π10 statement is equivalent to a consistency statement, it is not actually so easy to have a robust conception of "ordinary" mathematics that excludes the kinds of issues that logicians investigate. Indeed, I find the category at bottom as meaningless and irritating as "natural". But […]
  • Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Ordinary mathematics intrinsically requiring unbounded replacement/specification?
    There is a whole literature on this.
  • Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Ordinary mathematics intrinsically requiring unbounded replacement/specification?
    I don't view that kind of justification as different in kind from the essentially similar story that people with the universe view tell about the cumulative hierarchy going all the way up in a totally deterministic manner, getting ZFC and much more, including large cardinals, on philosophical reflection grounds. In both cases, the justifications proceed […]
  • Comment by Joel David Hamkins on Ordinary mathematics intrinsically requiring unbounded replacement/specification?
    Well, no theory can be justified to be sound in a non-circular way, except by appealing to a stronger theory in the metatheory, which one might naturally take to show that the object theory should have been stronger to begin with.

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Subscribe to receive update notifications by email.

Tags

  • absoluteness
  • buttons+switches
  • CH
  • chess
  • computability
  • continuum hypothesis
  • countable models
  • definability
  • determinacy
  • elementary embeddings
  • forcing
  • forcing axioms
  • games
  • GBC
  • generic multiverse
  • geology
  • ground axiom
  • HOD
  • hypnagogic digraph
  • indestructibility
  • infinitary computability
  • infinite chess
  • infinite games
  • ITTMs
  • kids
  • KM
  • large cardinals
  • Leibnizian models
  • maximality principle
  • modal logic
  • models of PA
  • multiverse
  • open games
  • Oxford
  • philosophy of mathematics
  • pluralism
  • pointwise definable
  • potentialism
  • PSC-CUNY
  • supercompact
  • truth
  • universal algorithm
  • universal definition
  • universal program
  • Victoria Gitman
Proudly powered by WordPress
Buy Me A Coffee