• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

To prove 2 is FINITE, we need to know that 4 is a NATURAL number?

tonychanyt

24/7 Christian
Oct 2, 2011
6,061
2,239
Toronto
Visit site
✟196,430.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Using Peano Axioms, Dr. Alexander Pruss says:

We've proved that 2 is a natural number and hence finite.
Peano Axioms does not prove that 2 is a finite number. That requires a different proof. (See Appendix.)

That sounds great until we realize that It has taken us 4 non-axiom steps to do this and we are worried
No worry. You are not trying to prove that 4 is a natural or finite number. You have only proved that 2 is a natural number.

and the reason we started worry about what is finite because we are worried how do we know that we are dealing with finite proofs.
No worry. We know that it is a finite proof when the proof stops as you did.

So it seems like that to prove 2 is finite, we use a proof that has 4 non-axiomatic steps, and to know that that's a good proof, we need to know that 4 is a natural number.
(Bold emphases added)

No, you don't need to prove 4 is a natural number to prove 2 is. You only need to make sure that when you are proving 2, your proof terminates. You are not required to count the number of steps. That's not part of the formal Peano proof. Pruss conflated the definition of a natural number and the definition of a finite number. A natural number and a finite number are two distinct mathematical concepts.

=================================
Appendix 1

In set theory, a finite number corresponds to the cardinality of a finite set—a set that contains a specific, limited number of elements. Formally:

A set S is finite if there exists a bijection (one-to-one correspondence) between S and the set {1,2,3,…,n} for some natural number n. The number n is called the cardinality of the set S, and it is a finite number.

You can prove that 2 is a finite number according to this set-theoretic definition. Using von Neumann ordinal construction:

  • 0=∅ (the empty set),
  • 1={0}={∅},
  • 2={0,1}={∅,{∅}},
Therefore, 2 is a finite number. There is no need to know that 4 is a natural number.

===============================

Appendix 2

In the video, Pruss' son raised the question: Is infinity odd or even?

My answer:

Infinity is not a natural number. The parity property does not apply to infinity. Is π odd or even?
 
Last edited: