Ferreirós, José (2024), "The Early Development of Set Theory", in Zalta, Edward N.; Nodelman, Uri (eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2024 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, archived from the original on 2023-03-20, retrieved 2025-01-04
Ferreirós, José (2024), "The Early Development of Set Theory", in Zalta, Edward N.; Nodelman, Uri (eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2024 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, archived from the original on 2023-03-20, retrieved 2025-01-04
Bagaria, Joan (2020), "Set Theory", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2020 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 2020-08-20
Rodych 2018, §2.1: "When we prove a theorem or decide a proposition, we operate in a purely formal, syntactical manner. In doing mathematics, we do not discover pre-existing truths that were 'already there without one knowing' (PG 481)—we invent mathematics, bit-by-little-bit." Note, however, that Wittgenstein does not identify such deduction with philosophical logic; cf. Rodych §1, paras. 7-12.
Rodych 2018, §3.4: "Given that mathematics is a 'motley of techniques of proof' (RFM III, §46), it does not require a foundation (RFM VII, §16) and it cannot be given a self-evident foundation (PR §160; WVC 34 & 62; RFM IV, §3). Since set theory was invented to provide mathematics with a foundation, it is, minimally, unnecessary."
Rodych 2018, §2.2: "An expression quantifying over an infinite domain is never a meaningful proposition, not even when we have proved, for instance, that a particular number n has a particular property."
Taylor, Melissa August, Harriet Barovick, Michelle Derrow, Tam Gray, Daniel S. Levy, Lina Lofaro, David Spitz, Joel Stein and Chris (14 June 1999), "The 100 Worst Ideas Of The Century", TIME, retrieved 12 April 2025{{cite magazine}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
