Skip to main content

Second-Order Logic and Foundations of Mathematics


We discuss the differences between first-order set theory and second-order logic as a foundation for mathematics. We analyse these languages in terms of two levels of formalization. The analysis shows that if second-order logic is understood in its full semantics capable of characterizing categorically central mathematical concepts, it relies entirely on informal reasoning. On the other hand, if it is given a weak semantics, it loses its power in expressing concepts categorically. First-order set theory and second-order logic are not radically different: the latter is a major fragment of the former.

Hide All
[1] Barwise K. Jon, Absolute logics and L∞ω , Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 4 (1972), pp. 309340.
[2] Henkin Leon, Completeness in the theory of types, The Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 15 (1950), pp. 8191.
[3] Hintikka Jaakko, Reductions in the theory of types, Acta Philos. Fenn., vol. 8 (1955), pp. 57115.
[4] Hintikka Jaakko, The principles of mathematics revisited, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996, with an appendix by Gabriel Sandu.
[5] Kreisel G., Informal rigour and completeness proofs, Proceedings of the international colloquium in the philosophy of science, London, 1965 (Lakatos Imre, editor), vol. 1, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1967, pp. 138157.
[6] Lindström Per, On extensions of elementary logic, Theoria, vol. 35 (1969), pp. 111.
[7] Lindström Per, A note on weak second order logic with variables for elementarily definable relations, The proceedings of the Bertrand Russell memorial conference (Uldum, 1971), Bertrand Russell Memorial Logic Conference, Leeds, 1973, pp. 221233.
[8] Montague Richard, Reduction of higher-order logic, Theory of models (Proceedings of the 1963 international symposium Berkeley), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1965, pp. 251264.
[9] Montague Richard, Set theory and higher-order logic, Formal systems and recursive functions (Proceedings of the eighth logic colloquium, Oxford, 1963), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1965, pp. 131148.
[10] Mostowski Andrzej, Concerning the problem of axiomatizability of the field of real numbers in the weak second order logic, Essays on the foundations of mathematics, Magnes Press, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 1961, pp. 269286.
[11] Shapiro Stewart, Foundations without foundationalism, A case for second-order logic, Oxford Science Publications, The Clarendon Press Oxford University Press, New York, 1991.
[12] Shelah Saharon, The spectrum problem. I. ℵε -saturated models, the main gap, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 43 (1982), no. 4, pp. 324356.
[13] Shelah Saharon, The spectrum problem. II. Totally transcendental and infinite depth, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 43 (1982), no. 4, pp. 357364.
[14] Simpson Stephen G., Subsystems of second order arithmetic, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999.
[15] Tarski Alfred, A decision method for elementary algebra and geometry, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, 1948.
[16] Väänänen Jouko, Set-theoretic definability of logics, Model-theoretic logics, Springer, New York, 1985, pp. 599643.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Bulletin of Symbolic Logic
  • ISSN: 1079-8986
  • EISSN: 1943-5894
  • URL: /core/journals/bulletin-of-symbolic-logic
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *