If I give you the following definition of the set $A$, how could you prove it is equal the set of the natural numbers without an explicit definiton for the latter?
The set $A$ is inductively defined as follows:
i) $0 \in A$; and
ii) $\forall n$, a natural number, if $n \in A$, then $n+1 \in A$.
I can easily prove that $A$ is contained in the natural numbers, but I'm failing to see how to prove the converse without a similar definition for the natural numbers.
Thanks for taking the time to read me.
An inductive set $A$ is any set with the following properties:
You can prove that $\mathbb{N}$ is an inductive set, and that if $A$ is any inductive set, then $\mathbb{N}\subseteq A$, but the other way around is false, that is, you can't prove that $A\subseteq\mathbb{N}$. Take for example $A=\mathbb{N}\cup\left\{a\right\}$, where $a$ is anything except a natural number. $A$ is inductive, but it is obvious that $A\subseteq\mathbb{N}$ is false.
Anyway, as far as I know, the best definition of the set of natural numbers is the following one: $\forall x\left(x\in\mathbb{N}\leftrightarrow\forall A\left(x\in A\right)\right)$, where $A$ is any inductive set.