Introduction to Mathematical PhilosophyRussell, Bertrand
Philosophy
Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy
Russell, Bertrand
Mathematics -- Philosophy
Let us consider the question the other way round. What are
the numbers that can be reached, given the terms "0" and
[Pg 20]
"successor"? Is there any way by which we can define the
whole class of such numbers? We reach 1, as the successor of 0;
2, as the successor of 1; 3, as the successor of 2; and so on. It
is this "and so on" that we wish to replace by something less
vague and indefinite. We might be tempted to say that "and
so on" means that the process of proceeding to the successor
may be repeated any finite number of times; but the problem
upon which we are engaged is the problem of defining "finite
number," and therefore we must not use this notion in our definition.
Our definition must not assume that we know what a
finite number is.
The key to our problem lies in mathematical induction. It will
be remembered that, in Chapter I., this was the fifth of the five
primitive propositions which we laid down about the natural
numbers. It stated that any property which belongs to 0, and
to the successor of any number which has the property, belongs
to all the natural numbers. This was then presented as a principle,
but we shall now adopt it as a definition. It is not difficult
to see that the terms obeying it are the same as the numbers
that can be reached from 0 by successive steps from next to
next, but as the point is important we will set forth the matter
in some detail.
We shall do well to begin with some definitions, which will be
useful in other connections also.
A property is said to be "hereditary" in the natural-number
series if, whenever it belongs to a number , it also belongs to
,
the successor of . Similarly a class is said to be "hereditary"
if, whenever is a member of the class, so is . It is
easy to see, though we are not yet supposed to know, that to say
a property is hereditary is equivalent to saying that it belongs
to all the natural numbers not less than some one of them, e.g.
it must belong to all that are not less than 100, or all that are
less than 1000, or it may be that it belongs to all that are not
less than 0, i.e. to all without exception.
A property is said to be "inductive" when it is a hereditary
[Pg 21]
property which belongs to 0. Similarly a class is "inductive"
when it is a hereditary class of which 0 is a member.
Given a hereditary class of which 0 is a member, it follows
that 1 is a member of it, because a hereditary class contains the
successors of its members, and 1 is the successor of 0. Similarly,
given a hereditary class of which 1 is a member, it follows that
2 is a member of it; and so on. Thus we can prove by a step-by-step
procedure that any assigned natural number, say 30,000,
is a member of every inductive class.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account