From owner-qed Thu Aug 18 00:32:43 1994
Received: from localhost (listserv@localhost) by antares.mcs.anl.gov (8.6.4/8.6.4) id AAA21217 for qed-out; Thu, 18 Aug 1994 00:30:39 -0500
Received: from chelm.nmt.edu (chelm.nmt.edu [129.138.6.50]) by antares.mcs.anl.gov (8.6.4/8.6.4) with ESMTP id AAA21212 for <qed@mcs.anl.gov>; Thu, 18 Aug 1994 00:30:33 -0500
Received: (from yodaiken@localhost) by chelm.nmt.edu (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) id XAA10065; Wed, 17 Aug 1994 23:33:39 -0600
Message-Id: <199408180533.XAA10065@chelm.nmt.edu>
From: yodaiken@sphinx.nmt.edu (Victor Yodaiken)
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 1994 23:33:39 -0600
In-Reply-To: boyer@CLI.COM (Robert S. Boyer)
       "set theory" (Aug 13,  9:33am)
reply_to: yodaiken@chelm.nmt.edu
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: boyer@CLI.COM (Robert S. Boyer), qed@mcs.anl.gov
Subject: Re: set theory
Sender: owner-qed@mcs.anl.gov
Precedence: bulk

On Aug 13,  9:33am, Robert S. Boyer wrote:
 Subject: set theory
>John McCarthy writes:
>
>  I suspect that set theory can serve as a universal language.
>
>While I believe that proposition is true in a technical sense, I think
>it is false in a more important logistical sense.  I believe that a

I don't even know if it is true in a technical sense.  Certainly one 
can encode everything in set theory, but  one can also  do number
theory with roman numerals. The technical advantages of either project
are not obvious.