Introduction to Mathematical PhilosophyRussell, Bertrand
Philosophy
Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy
Russell, Bertrand
Mathematics -- Philosophy
It will be useful to give a definition of the number which is
that of the inductive cardinals. For this purpose we will
first define the kind of series exemplified by the inductive cardinals
in order of magnitude. The kind of series which is called a
"progression" has already been considered in Chapter I. It is a
series which can be generated by a relation of consecutiveness:
[Pg 81]
every member of the series is to have a successor, but there is
to be just one which has no predecessor, and every member of
the series is to be in the posterity of this term with respect to
the relation "immediate predecessor." These characteristics
may be summed up in the following definition:[20]—
[20]Cf. Principia Mathematica, vol. II. * 123.
A "progession" is a one-one relation such that there is just
one term belonging to the domain but not to the converse domain,
and the domain is identical with the posterity of this one term.
It is easy to see that a progression, so defined, satisfies Peano's
five axioms. The term belonging to the domain but not to the
converse domain will be what he calls "0"; the term to which
a term has the one-one relation will be the "successor" of the
term; and the domain of the one-one relation will be what
he calls "number." Taking his five axioms in turn, we have
the following translations:—
(1) "0 is a number" becomes: "The member of the domain
which is not a member of the converse domain is a member of
the domain." This is equivalent to the existence of such a
member, which is given in our definition. We will call this
member "the first term."
(2) "The successor of any number is a number" becomes:
"The term to which a given member of the domain has the relation
in question is again a member of the domain." This is
proved as follows: By the definition, every member of the
domain is a member of the posterity of the first term; hence
the successor of a member of the domain must be a member of
the posterity of the first term (because the posterity of a term
always contains its own successors, by the general definition of
posterity), and therefore a member of the domain, because by
the definition the posterity of the first term is the same as the
domain.
(3) "No two numbers have the same successor." This is
only to say that the relation is one-many, which it is by definition
(being one-one).
[Pg 82]
(4) "0 is not the successor of any number" becomes: "The
first term is not a member of the converse domain," which is
again an immediate result of the definition.
(5) This is mathematical induction, and becomes: "Every
member of the domain belongs to the posterity of the first term,"
which was part of our definition.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account