Joel David Hamkins & Graham Priest: The Liar Paradox & The Set-Theoretic Multiverse | RP #60

  Рет қаралды 4,591

Robinson Erhardt

Robinson Erhardt

Күн бұрын

Joel David Hamkins is the O’Hara Professor of Philosophy and Mathematics at the University of Notre Dame, where he recently moved from the University of Oxford. Joel is one of the world’s leading set theorists and philosophers of mathematics. Graham Priest is a Distinguished Professor in the philosophy department at the CUNY Graduate Center. He is one of the most influential philosophers of the past fifty years, and has done important work on a wide range of topics, ranging from the philosophy of mathematics (his doctorate is in mathematics from the London School of Economics) to logic and eastern philosophy. Robinson, Graham, and Joel discuss two topics-the liar paradox and the set-theoretic multiverse. More particularly, they address how solutions to the former revolve around questions of logical pluralism (is there more than one “correct” logic, and if so, how should we determine which to use in any given situation?), and regarding the latter, they address the metaphysics of the multiverse, how the multiverse theory squares with its monist alternative, and how it relates to the age-old question: Is mathematics created or discovered? Some resources for background information are included below. Check out Joel’s current project, The Book of Infinity, which is an accessible text on paradoxes and infinity. Joel has made the novel move of serializing it on Substack, so you can participate in its creation by checking out the link below, and otherwise see what he’s thinking about and working on through Twitter, MathOverflow, and his blog. You can keep up with Graham and his ever-growing, immense body of work through his website.
Graham’s Website: grahampriest.net
Joel’s Blog: jdh.hamkins.org
Joel's MathOverflow: mathoverflow.net/users/1946/j...
Joel's Substack: joeldavidhamkins.substack.com
Joel's Twitter: / jdhamkins
Background:
The Liar Paradox on the SEP: plato.stanford.edu/entries/li...
Set Theory on the SEP: plato.stanford.edu/entries/se...
Robinson's Website: robinsonerhardt.com
OUTLINE:
00:00 In This Episode…
1:12 Introduction
11:16 Graham’s History with the Liar Paradox
12:51 An Explication of the Liar
15:03 Paraconsistent Logic and the Liar
32:32 A Deflationary Account of Truth and the Liar
34:51 Joel’s Approach to the Liar
38:37 Hartry Field and the Liar
41:18 The Yablo Paradox
48:22 When to Change the Logic
56:24 A Difference in Opinion on Logic?
1:01:44 The Set-Theoretic Multiverse
1:14:43 Monism and Pluralism About the Set-Theoretic Universe
1:35:35 Philosophical Answers to Mathematical Questions
1:39:16 On Woodin’s Program
1:46:12 Logical Pluralism and the Set-Theoretic Multiverse
1:58:13 The Metaphysics of the Set-Theoretic Multiverse
2:09:42 Is Mathematics Created or Discovered?
2:16:59 The Continuity From Ancient To Contemporary Mathematics
Robinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University. Join him in conversations with philosophers, scientists, weightlifters, artists, and everyone in-between.

Пікірлер: 54
@joeldavidhamkins5484
@joeldavidhamkins5484 Жыл бұрын
Joan Bagaria, mentioned in the introduction, is staunchly Catalan, rather than Spanish, and based in Barcelona.
@robinsonerhardt
@robinsonerhardt Жыл бұрын
thank you for clarifying this!
@berick0176
@berick0176 Жыл бұрын
This is certainly one of the podcasts of all time
@robinsonerhardt
@robinsonerhardt Жыл бұрын
that’s precisely what I want to hear
@pawarranger
@pawarranger Жыл бұрын
wow what a treat
@robinsonerhardt
@robinsonerhardt Жыл бұрын
🦢
@Spacegraham
@Spacegraham Жыл бұрын
Great lineup...great video!
@robinsonerhardt
@robinsonerhardt Жыл бұрын
thanks graham
@zeke4665
@zeke4665 Жыл бұрын
Love both guests. And awesome dialogue. But I like the mustache even more
@robinsonerhardt
@robinsonerhardt Жыл бұрын
I prefer the guests but am enjoying the mustache too
@StephenPaulKing
@StephenPaulKing 9 ай бұрын
Robinson, you might look into Non-well founded set theory. Jon Barwise, no longer with us, did a lot of work on its application in computer science.
@Erin-un3xp
@Erin-un3xp Жыл бұрын
The electrons in that painting is definitely a responsive energy!
@romanbesel4759
@romanbesel4759 Жыл бұрын
Those are two of my favorite thinkers. If you now bring Penelope Maddy on, I die a happy man.
@robinsonerhardt
@robinsonerhardt Жыл бұрын
will get to work on that, then!
@ReflectiveJourney
@ReflectiveJourney Жыл бұрын
super hyped for this one.
@robinsonerhardt
@robinsonerhardt Жыл бұрын
me too and I’ve listened three times
@annesmith2400
@annesmith2400 Жыл бұрын
Discussion much appreciated TY gentlemen 💕
@muhammadhanzlaqadri7229
@muhammadhanzlaqadri7229 Жыл бұрын
Wish you could’ve invited Hartry Field too.
@mikhailfranco
@mikhailfranco 11 ай бұрын
I recommend the book: _The Liar: An Essay on Truth and Circularity_ Barwise and Etchemendy
@bilgekoksal3537
@bilgekoksal3537 Жыл бұрын
Great video! I wonder how the discussion at the end of the part Paraconsistent Logic and the Liar would go on. It seems reasonable that replacing the liar sentence with "this sentence is either false or not well-formed" should be giving rise to another paradox for Joel. Although he says he wouldn't recognize it as a well-formed proposition in the first place (which I am inclined to accept), then I am not so happy, because I can argue again what Graham said, and I feel like going back and forth between these is the liar all over again. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
@Erin-un3xp
@Erin-un3xp Жыл бұрын
This is great!
@robinsonerhardt
@robinsonerhardt Жыл бұрын
I'm so glad you like it :)
@StephenPaulKing
@StephenPaulKing 9 ай бұрын
Self-consistency of axioms seems to be the criteria of existence of a logical system. How is self-consistency proven internally in such cases?
@MasterBoshan
@MasterBoshan Жыл бұрын
I saw this when it had
@robinsonerhardt
@robinsonerhardt Жыл бұрын
there’s a few billion people it hasn’t hit yet
@johnschindler4152
@johnschindler4152 Жыл бұрын
If I understand Sorensen's setup of Yablo's paradox (46:25) correctly, can't we assign alternating truth-values consistently with the relevant instances of the T-Schema? That is, all odd-numbered people speak truly and all even-numbered people speak falsely, or vice versa.
@joeldavidhamkins5484
@joeldavidhamkins5484 Жыл бұрын
If the Yablo assertions assert "all later assertions are false," then your proposal wouldn't work. If they each merely assert "the next assertion is false", then your proposal is fine. It is the former situation, consequently, that is more paradoxical.
@patrickwithee7625
@patrickwithee7625 Жыл бұрын
Isn’t the Liar’s Paradox a formal fallacy? That is, we can’t just define A=~A at the meta-level, but this seems to be exactly what the Liar’s Paradox is doing. Clearly, if you suppose A~A, you’ll be able to get a contradiction and prove ~(A~A). Those seem to be our two options: prove that an in-language formalization of the Paradox is just an inconsistency, or fallaciously define a formula as its negation. In terms of natural language, I agree that “this sentence is false” seems to be saying something, but we know that a formal theory’s truth isn’t definable by that formal theory, a la Tarski. So, whatever it’s saying is either just absurdity in a different fashion, or it’s just a demonstration that semantic truth is logic/theory-specific.
@BlakeErhardt-Ohren
@BlakeErhardt-Ohren Жыл бұрын
@robinsonerhardt
@robinsonerhardt Жыл бұрын
yes agreed
@pmcate2
@pmcate2 9 күн бұрын
the poor audio on graham's end kinda makes this unlistenable.
@pairadeau
@pairadeau Жыл бұрын
this
@timdion9527
@timdion9527 8 ай бұрын
All logicians are liars. It is the only solution to the Liar's Paradox... Alas, my statement is true but not provable.
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 Жыл бұрын
This discussion is pointless, as neither the mathematician or the philosopher understand computational foundations.
@jwp4016
@jwp4016 10 ай бұрын
This the perfect youtube comment for the most renowned logician and set theorist lol
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 10 ай бұрын
@@jwp4016 "Renowned". Joel Hamkins is a good set theorist, but he doesn't follow modern foundations, although he's a finitist when you compare him to other set theorists.
@pmcate2
@pmcate2 9 күн бұрын
@@annaclarafenyo8185 It's not clear how you came to the conclusion that Joel is more finitist than set theorists. Much of his work is infinitary.
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 9 күн бұрын
@@pmcate2 He's a finitist compared to Woodin. Woodin still thinks the Continuum Hypothesis has an answer.
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 9 күн бұрын
@@pmcate2 It is not easy to see when work in set theory is "infinitary". Likely the most finitist person in set theory was Cohen, the second in line is Solovay.
@annesmith2400
@annesmith2400 Жыл бұрын
Eubulides the Megarian🏺😎 💞impredicativity💞
Useful gadget for styling hair 🤩💖 #gadgets #hairstyle
00:20
FLIP FLOP Hacks
Рет қаралды 9 МЛН
Finger Heart - Fancy Refill (Inside Out Animation)
00:30
FASH
Рет қаралды 25 МЛН
Эффект Карбонаро и нестандартная коробка
01:00
История одного вокалиста
Рет қаралды 10 МЛН
Ep. 83 - Logic, Contradictions, and the Liar Paradox | Dr. Graham Priest
1:22:59
9  Buddhism & Science - Interview with Graham Priest
34:04
Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh
Рет қаралды 10 М.
Joel David Hamkins: Philosophy of mathematics and truth
1:26:30
Matthew Geleta
Рет қаралды 4,2 М.
Niall Ferguson: After the Treason of the Intellectuals
50:15
University of Austin
Рет қаралды 347 М.
Graham Priest: The Metaphysics of Nothingness | Robinson's Podcast #38
2:56:10
Infinite Sets and Foundations (Joel David Hamkins) | Ep. 17
2:05:48
Useful gadget for styling hair 🤩💖 #gadgets #hairstyle
00:20
FLIP FLOP Hacks
Рет қаралды 9 МЛН