Perhaps this is just a skill issue, but I’ve seen a lot of good programmers get CH-pilled and then waste a lot of time trying to think of the types of their working programs as rich propositions or trying to encode complex proofs about their programs in the types.
The Curry-Howard correspondence is only one of many lenses we can use to view the relationship between things and facts. Different lenses characterize different approaches to foundation:
- Propositions are basic (single-sorted logics, ZF)
- Types are basic, some types are propositions (Homotopy Type Theory)
- Propositions and types are the same (Martin-Löf’s Type Theory)
- Propositions and types are different but equally basic (Logic-enriched Type Theory)
Shulman explains how the Axiom of Choice is true some but not in others, arguing that in certain respects, the HoTT’s way is the most “natural”: golem.ph.utexas.edu/category…
Adams & Luo argue instead for the practical virtues of making propositions and types completely separate: arxiv.org/html/0809.2061v3
9
1
38
7,485
No, even mathematicians think C-H euphoria is silly liamoc.net/forest/loc-000S/i…
Sep 25, 2026 · 2:09 PM UTC
3
333



