Strange Proof: The Principle of Mathematical Induction implies that 1 is the least positive natural number. I have just begun using Judson's 2018 Abstract Algebra: theory and applications.
In the text, there is a Lemma with the following statement and proof:
The Principle of Mathematical Induction implies that 1 is the least positive natural number.
Proof.
Let $S=\{n \in \mathbb{N} | n \ge 1\}$.
Then $1 \in S$.
Assume that $n \in S$.
Since $0<1$, it must be the case that $n=n+0<n+1$.
Therefore, $1 \le n < n+1$.
Consequently, if $n \in S$, then $n+1$ must also be in $S$, and by the Principle of Mathematical Induction, and $S=\mathbb{N}$. QED.
I am having some issues with this proof.


*

*The last sentence doesn't seem coherent.

*S is defined as the set of natural numbers $\ge1$, but I don't understand how the proof shows that $S = \mathbb{N}$ to arrive at the conclusion that 1 is the least positive natural number.


Prior to this Lemma we are given the definition of natural numbers $\mathbb{N}=\{1,2,3,...\}$, and as propositions the First and Second Principle of Mathematical Induction, as well as the Principle of Well-Ordering.
Can anyone either help me understand why this proof is correct or otherwise help me fill in what may be missing?
 A: The proof showed that 


*

*$1\in S$ and

*for every $n\in S$, we have $n+1\in S$.


By using Peano axiomatic (aka the principle of induction), the proof correctly concludes that $S=\Bbb N$. Thus every natural number is $\geq 1$. Hence, by definition, $1$ is a smallest number of $\Bbb N$ (it is in fact also the only smallest number of $\Bbb N$.)
A: You might think that since $\mathbb{N}$ is defined to be $\{1,2,\dots\}$ this proof is pointless. Although Judson doesn't make this clear, the point of this proof is that it gives us an alternative more formal way of describing the properties of $\mathbb{N}$ without using the informal ellipsis; if we take an appropriate version of induction as an axiom then we don't need to define  $\mathbb{N}$ to be  $\{1,2,\dots\}$.
Unfortunately, the form of induction stated by Judson does not give a correct proof of this theorem. Judson's version only proves that $n\ge1$ for all $n\ge1$. The version of induction that's needed for this theorem is something like the following: 
Let $S(n$) be a statement about integers for $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and suppose $S(1)$ is true. If for all integers $k$ with $k \ge1$, $S(k)$ implies that $S(k + 1)$ is true, then $S(n)$ is true for all integers $n\in\mathbb{N}$.
