/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14479727
In a landmark series of calculations
lol.
Also, to the cunt who was defending set-theory as the foundation of maths and quoting from the wikipedia article in the /lit/ thread that got pruned.
> >>20384645
>Husserl never claimed that mathematics could or should be grounded in part-whole rather than set theory.
This is why you should not trust Wikipedia articles.
> Husserl’s early first-hand experience of inconsistent sets and some of the more logic defying aspects of Cantor’s theory of sets might actually have permanently inoculated the future founder of the phenomenological movement against any recourse to sets or classes. For Husserl would express grave doubts about extensional logic, by which he meant a calculus of classes (p. 443, for example), for the rest of his career. He would say that extensional logic was naive, risky, doubtful and the source of many a contradiction requiring every kind of artful device to make it safe for use in reasoning ([19, pp. 74, 76, 83]; [18, p. 153]), a wariness already evident in “The Deductive Calculus and the Logic of Contents” and related articles (pp. 92–114, 115–120, 121–130, 135–138, 443-451) in which we find Husserl intent upon laying bare the “the follies of extensional logic” (p. 199) which he would replace by a calculus of conceptual objects. In these texts he seeks to show “that the total formal basis upon which the class calculus rests is valid for the relationships between conceptual objects,” and that one could solve logical problems without “the detour through classes” (p. 109), which he considered to be “totally superficial” (p. 123).