Element contents
Ontology and the Foundations of Mathematics
Talking Past Each Other
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 January 2022
Summary
This Element looks at the problem of inter-translation between mathematical realism and anti-realism and argues that so far as realism is inter-translatable with anti-realism, there is a burden on the realist to show how her posited reality differs from that of the anti-realist. It also argues that an effective defence of just such a difference needs a commitment to the independence of mathematical reality, which in turn involves a commitment to the ontological access problem – the problem of how knowable mathematical truths are identifiable with a reality independent of us as knowers. Specifically, if the only access problem acknowledged is the epistemological problem – i.e. the problem of how we come to know mathematical truths – then nothing is gained by the realist notion of an independent reality and in effect, nothing distinguishes realism from anti-realism in mathematics.
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781108592505Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 10 February 2022
Bibliography
Balaguer, M. (1998), Platonism and Anti-Platonism in Mathematics, Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coffa, A. (1991), The Semantic Tradition from Kant to Carnap, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Folina, J. (1994), ‘Poincare’s conception of the objectivity of mathematics’, Philosophia Mathematica, 2(3), 202–27.Google Scholar
Frege, G. (1970), ‘On sense and reference’, in Peter Geach (ed.) and Max Black (trans.), Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 56–78.Google Scholar
Frege, G. (1984), Collected Papers on Mathematics, Logic, and Philosophy, ed. McGuinness, Brian, trans. Max Black et al., Basil Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
Gaifman, H. (2012), ‘On ontology and realism in mathematics’, The Review of Symbolic Logic, 5(3), 480–512, doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755020311000372Google Scholar
Gödel, K. (2001), Kurt Gödel: Collected Works Volume IV: Publications 1929–1936, ed. Solomon Feferman, John W. Dawson, Jr., Stephen C. Kleene, Gregory H. Moore, Robert M. Solovay, and Jean van Heijenoort, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Hellman, G. and Shapiro, S. (2019), Mathematical Structuralism, Cambridge Elements, The Philosophy of Mathematics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Husserl, E. (1964), The Idea of Phenomenology, Alston, William P. and Nakhnikian, George (trans.), Nijhoff, The Hague. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00071773.2001.11007353Google Scholar
Jenkins, C. S. (2005), ‘Realism and independence’, American Philosophical Quarterly, 42(3), 199–209.Google Scholar
Linnebo, Ø. (2018) ‘Platonism in the philosophy of mathematics’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2018 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/platonism-mathematics.Google Scholar
MacBride, F. (2008), ‘Can ante rem structuralism solve the access problem?’, The Philosophical Quarterly, 58, 155–64.Google Scholar
MEGS (2020), Mount Everest Geographical Society, www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/mount-everest.Google Scholar
Meillassoux, Q. (2008), ‘Time without becoming’ (transcript of talk, Middlesex University, London, 8 May).Google Scholar
Shapiro, S. (1997), Philosophy of Mathematics, Structure and Ontology, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Shapiro, S. (2000a), ‘The status of logic’, in New Essays on the a Priori, Boghossian and Peacocke, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 333–67.Google Scholar
Shapiro, S. (2000b), Thinking about Mathematics, The Philosophy of Mathematics, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Shapiro, S. (2011), ‘Epistemology of mathematics: what are the questions? What counts as answers?’, The Philosophical Quarterly, 61(242), 130–50.Google Scholar
Wright, C. (1992), Truth and Objectivity, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, C. (2000), ‘Truth as a sort of epistemic, Putnam’s peregrinations’, The Journal of Philosophy, 97(6), 335–64.Google Scholar
Wright, C. (2004), ‘Warrant for nothing (and foundations for free)?’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, supplementary volume, 78(1), 167–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14
- Cited by