• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.43-86
• /
• 2019

If 1st order ZFC is consistent(has a model($M_1$)) it has a transitive denumerable model($M_2$). This leads to a paradoxical situation called 'Skolem paradox'. This can be easily resolved by Skolem's typical resolution. but In the process, we must accept the model theoretic relativity for the concept of set. This relativity can generate a situation where the meaning of the set concept, for example, is given differently depending on the two models. The problem is next. because the sentence '¬denu(PN)' which indicate that PN is not denumerable is equally true in two models, A indistinguishability problem that the concept <¬denu> is not formally indistinguishable in ZFC arise. First, I will give a detail analysis of what the nature of this problem is. And I will provide three ways of responding to this problem from the standpoint of supporting ZFC. First, I will argue that <¬denu> concept, which can be relative to the different models, can be 'almost' distinguished in ZFC by using the formalization of model theory in ZFC. Second, I will show that <¬denu> can change its meaning intrinsically or naturally, by its contextual dependency from the semantic considerations about quantifier that plays a key role in the relativity of <¬denu>. Thus, I will show the model-relative meaning change of <¬denu> concept is a natural phenomenon external to the language, not a matter of responsible for ZFC.