PHIL 350: FINAL EXAM SKELETON

Spring 2023

Comments on the “Skeleton” This document is prepared from the ac-

tual exam. However, it is possible that as time goes on, I will eliminate
problems from the actual test. I will not, however, add any problems.
Please read this document carefully. You should use it to make a plan for
what questions you intend to answer.
For some of the questions below, I give you the actual question that will
appear. Some I give nothing but the topic. And some I give you the set-up
of the question, allowing you to guess at what I might ask.

General advice: In an exam like this, you must strike a balance between
giving the details of an argument and being concise. You should use as a
general rule: could someone who is very smart but very lazy easily piece
together a very detailed argument only from what you say and a list of the
theorems we proved in the class? If the answer is “no”, you need to give
more detail.
Finally, realize that every exam is really just an exam to show what you
know. If you get stuck on something, then just say what you know that
might be relevant to that problem. It might be that you have all the pieces
but don’t see how they fit together. And then writing them all out gives you
the insight of how they do go together. And even if not, the writing out of
what you know gives and opportunity for partial credit.

Preamble to the exam There are 136 points of problems on this exam,
but the exam is graded out of 100: anything above 100 is counted as extra
credit. Obviously, you should aim to get as many points as you can in the
time alloted.

1
 You are required to to a certain number of problems per section. Please
indicate on your test copy which problems you want to count as
the main selections, and which for extra credit.
For extra credit: you must attempt all preceding parts of a question to
get credit for a given part of a question. I.e., if you do parts (a) and (c) but
neglect (b), you can only get credit for part (a). But you do (a) and (b) but
not (c), you can get credit for (a) and (b).
It may be to your advantage to use earlier questions in later questions:
“blah blah blah. By problem X, we have blah blah blah.” I didn’t design the
exam so that you could do that, but please feel free to do so if convenient.

1 Basics: 40 points
Complete all questions in this section.

1. (8 points) Complete this statement of the soundness theorem:

2. (8 points) We characterized completeness in two ways. One was:

(C1) Blah blah blah

Give the other statement, call it (C2). Then prove that (C1) holds iff
(C2) holds.

3. (8 points) State the Compactness theorem:

4. (8 points) Use the Completeness and Soundness theorems to prove . . .

5. (8 points) Prove that . . . (something about models and sizes of infinity).

2 Intermediate: 40 points
You must complete at least 4 questions from this section.

6. (8 points) Suppose Γ is a maximally consistent set of sentences of a

given language L. Prove that if Γ ⊢ ϕ then . . .

2
 7. (8 points) We argued in class using Dedekind’s categoricity theorem
that the Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem fails for full second-order logic.
Blah blah blah. (What else can we prove using DCT?)
8. (8 points) To construct a non-standard model of True Arithmetic (that
is, T h(N ), the set of all sentences of L, the language of first-order
arithmetic,1 that are true in the standard model N ), we enrich L to L′
by adding a new constant c.
Then we let T = T h(N ) ∪ {c = ̸ $n 0̄ | n ∈ N }, and show that every
finite subset of T has a model. By compactness, T has a model, call it
M.
Show . . . something about M.
9. (8 points) Suppose M is a model of a language L, and for every for-
mula ϕ(x) of L without quantifiers, there is a sentence of L ψ with no
quantifiers such that

M |= ∃xϕ(x) ↔ ψ. (1)
Show . . . something about all formulas. (If you want to prove something
about all formulas, what method should you use?)
10. Cantor’s pairing function p(x, y) = (x + y)(x + y + 1) + y is a bijection
from N × N to N.

(a) (3 points) Something.

(b) (5 points) Something about the pairing function that will need
you to use induction on n.

3 Conceptual: 26 points
Complete at least one question.
11. (13 points) You should know what Button and Walsh mean by “mod-
elism” and what motivates it. (Benacerraff Benacerraf Benacerraf)
12. (13 points) Button and Walsh claim that “moderate modelism is dead”.
You should know what this means and be able to outline the argument.
1 ¯ for symbols of the language of arithmetic.
I will use 0̄, $, ⊕, ⊗, <

3
4 Challenge: 30 points
You must attempt at least one full question in this section.

13. (a) (5 points) Blah blah blah . . . all and only infinite models of its
language. (What theorem should you use here? Infinite means
not finite.)
(b) (5 points) There are theories of FOL that have only infinite mod-
els. Here is an example, where “x ̸< y” means the negation of
“x < y”:2

Axiom English characterization

∀x∃y(x < y) Everything precedes something
∃x∀y(y ̸< x) Something has no predecessor
∀x(x ̸< x) Nothing precedes itself
∀x∀y(x < y → y ̸< x) Predecession is asymmetric
∀x∀y∀z(x < y ∧ y < z → x < z) Predecession is transitive
∀x∀y(x < y ∨ x = y ∨ y < x) Predecession is linear

(Something about the previous problem. You don’t need to actu-

ally do anything with this theory—it is just here as an example.)
(c) (5 points) Now do something with the theory in the previous prob-
lem. Use induction. You can probably guess what I’m going to
ask.

14. Modular arithmetic for k is the arithmetic of a clock: For example, if

the clock has 12 numbers, then the sum of n and m is equal to the
remainder of n + m when divided by 12. More generally, if your clock
has k numbers, then the sum of n and m, n ⊕ m, is the remainder of
n + m when divided by k. Likewise, the product of n and m, n ⊗ m,
will be the remainder when n × m is divided by k.
Say that Zk is a model of modular arithmetic for k. You may use this
fact in what follows.
2
While I characterize the last axiom as “Predecession is linear”, this is not strictly
correct. However, it is correct in the presence of the other axioms.

4
Here is a nice theory T in the language L whose non-logical vocabulary
is {0̄, 1̄, ⊕, ⊗}. T is the universal closures of:
x ⊕ 0̄ = 0̄ ⊕ x = x
x⊗1=1⊗x=x
(x ⊕ y) ⊕ z = x ⊕ (y ⊕ z)
(x ⊗ y) ⊗ z = x ⊗ (y ⊗ z)
x⊕y =y⊕x
x⊗y =y⊗x
∃y(x ⊕ y = 0̄)

For each k, the model Zk satisfies T .

Likewise, the standard model Z of the integers satisfies T . However,
let θ2 be the sentence
∃x(x ̸= 0̄ ∧ x ⊕ x = 0̄)}.
Let θ3 be
∃x(x ̸= 0̄ ∧ x1 ⊕ x ⊕ x = 0̄)}.
More generally, θn will be
∃x(x ̸= 0̄ ∧ x
| ⊕ .{z
. . ⊕ x} = 0̄)},
n many

i.e, there is a non-zero object that when added together n times makes
0.
Now note that for all n, Z |= ¬θn .
′
Let Tn+2 = T ∪ {θ2 , . . . , θn+2 } and
[
T′ = ′
Tn+2 .
n=0,1,2,...

′
(a) (5 points) Show . . . something about Tn+2 for all n.
HINT: On a clock, 12 = 0, right? So on a clock, what is 6 + 6?
(b) (5 points) A cool result about infinity and T ′ .
(c) (5 points) A very quick question about isomorphisms and T ′ .