OK, that is clearer. I guess we could call the revised argument the "cavalier attitude to refutation". I don't agree about the "much wider universe": Kripke s

OK, that is clearer. I guess we could call the revised argument the "cavalier attitude to refutation". I don't agree about the "much wider universe": Kripke semantics draws a line around what is possible, and tells us that intuitionistic structures can be embedded in families of partial classical structures that evolve towards (but need not reach) a classical structure. Structures inconsistent with this view can be intuitionistically refuted.