12
$\begingroup$

What would be the advantage of adopting ZF over other set theories such as New Foundation?

I am very curious, since it seems that there is no reason just to stick with ZF.

Edit: What about set theories other than NF? And why is NF's finite axiomatization possbility not attractive?

  • 0
    Have you had a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Foundations?2012-06-02
  • 7
    Familiarity. And for most things that most mathematicians do, all one needs is something that works well and that one can basically forget about. And, by the way, NF is *weird*.2012-06-02
  • 1
    What @André said. Squared.2012-06-02
  • 2
    To add a bit to André's comment, NF also refutes Choice, which is something I feel that most mathematicians appreciate (even if they are not consciously aware of it).2012-06-02
  • 0
    What about other systems? I was just giving NF as example. And by the way, why wouldn't finite axiomatization possibility of NF be attractive?2012-06-02
  • 0
    Some people apparently do find finite axiomatizability very attractive; I consider it something of mild interest and little importance.2012-06-02
  • 0
    NBG is also finitely axiomatisable and conservative over ZFC.2012-06-02
  • 0
    @Zhen: To paraphrase *Highlander*, there can be only one-sort!2012-06-02
  • 0
    And a well-known trick shows that every first-order theory with finitely many sorts is equivalent to one with one sort!2012-06-02

4 Answers 4