Skip to main content
Log in

Formalization, Syntax and the Standard Model of Arithmetic

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

I make an attempt at the description of the delicate role of the standard model of arithmetic for the syntax of formal systems. I try to assess whether the possible instability in the notion of finiteness deriving from the nonstandard interpretability of arithmetic affects the very notions of syntactic metatheory and of formal system. I maintain that the crucial point of the whole question lies in the evaluation of the phenomenon of formalization. The ideas of Skolem, Zermelo, Beth and Carnap (among others) on the problem are discussed.

‘A tries to explain to B the meaning of negation. Finally A gives up, saying: “You don’t understand what I mean, and I am not going to explain any longer,” to which B replies: “Yes, I see what you mean, and I am glad you are willing to continue your explanations”’.

G. Mannoury, reported by E. W. Beth (Beth, 1963, 489)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Benacerraf, P.: 1985, ‘Skolem and the Skeptic’. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume 59, 85–115.

  • Beth, E. W.: 1963, ‘Carnap’s views on the advantages of constructed systems over natural languages in the philosophy of language’. With a reply by Rudolf Carnap. In (P. A. Schilpp, 1963, 469–502 and 927–33).

  • R. Carnap (1937) The Logical Syntax of Language Routledge London

    Google Scholar 

  • E. Cassirer (1929) Philosophie der symbolischen Formen, Vol. III: Phänomenologie der Erkenntnis Bruno Cassirer Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • A. Kanamori (1994) The Higher Infinite Springer New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreisel, G.: 1967, ‘Informal Rigour and Completeness Proofs’, in Lakatos, I. (ed.), Problems in the Philosophy of Mathematics (Proceedings of the London congress, 1965), North Holland, Amsterdam, 1967, 138–86.

  • Lolli, G.: 1985, ‘La matematica: i linguaggi e gli oggetti’, in Mangione, C. (ed.), Scienza e filosofia, Garzanti, Milano, 1985, 213–40.

  • G. Moore (1980) ArticleTitle‘Beyond First–order Logic’ History and Philosophy of Logic 1 95–137

    Google Scholar 

  • P.A. Schilpp (Eds) (1963) The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap Open Court La Salle

    Google Scholar 

  • Skolem, T.: 1922, ‘Einige Bemerkungen zur axiomatischen Begründung der Mengenlehre’. Eng. trans. in J. van Heijenoort (ed.), From Frege to Gödel, Harvard U.P., Cambridge, Mass., 1967, 290–301.

  • E. Zermelo (1929) ArticleTitle‘Über den Begriff der Definitheit in der Axiomatik’ Fundamenta Mathematicae 14 339–344

    Google Scholar 

  • E. Zermelo (1931) ArticleTitle‘Über Stufen der Quantifikation und die Logik des Unendlichen’ Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung (Angelegenheiten) 31 85–88

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luca Bellotti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bellotti, L. Formalization, Syntax and the Standard Model of Arithmetic. Synthese 154, 199–229 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-0900-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-0900-x

MSC 2000

Navigation