Platonism in Modern Mathematics

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Platonism in Modern Mathematics PLATONISM IN MODERN MATHEMATICS A University Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, East Bay In Partial Fulfillment ofthe Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Interdisciplinary Studies By Ramal Lamar October, 2012 PLATONISM IN MODERN MATHEMATICS By Ramal Lamar Date: INTRODUCTION In this thesis we investigate the existence of Platonic ideas in the concepts and foundations of modern mathematics. Platonism refers to the viewpoint that the objects and entities constructed and defined in the work of mathematics actually exist independent of our sense preception. In the first chapter, we look at how Platonism itself has been interpreted differently by modern thinkers and how this leads to confusion at times as to what is actually Platonism. Therefore by articulating specific ideas constructed by Plato and showing their analogs in today’s mathematical notation, we can speak of ‘mathematical Platonism.’ For example, numbers are not just figments of the imagination; there is a symbol known as one to refer to the concept of ‘oneness.’ Of course, philosophers disagree as to what constitutes Platonism, whether Platonism, also known as realism, is necessary in order to obtain truth and to solve mathematical problems with implications in the applied areas of science and technology. Also in this thesis, we describe the various schools of mathematical thought. Each school tackles its own philosophical problem and we highlight some of the major contributions associated with each school. In the second chapter, we survey a recent history of mathematics by exploring the five foundations of mathematics. The philosophical program of the logicist school is to ground mathematics proper in the rules of logic. Frege tried to deduce arithmetic from the rules of logic. Whitehead and Russell remedied the flaw of Frege’s system with type theory. For the nominalists, mathematical objects exist in space and time and logic’s business is to approximate reality. Nominalists such as Carnap and Quine equate logic ii with physics. The formalist school holds the view that every mathematical problem is solvable by finite proof methods, thus a new field of studying the structure, or syntax and mathematical arguments and proof, was developed in this school known as mathematics. Thus, the meaning of mathematical symbols are removed, and a math proof is analyzed by deriving such a proof from a series of formal axioms and rules of inference performed in a series of logical steps. The intuitonist school of mathematics simply assumes that mathematics is a man-made activity stemming from imagination and creativity. Thus logic is not math, but logic itself is an area of mathematical study, and in no way do they rely on each other. Finally, set theorists describe all mathematical objects as sets. Cantor developed this school with his studies in the infinite. When he showed that there are certain infinite sets that can not map to infinite numbers, this led to the analysis of infinity in modern mathematics. All the schools of mathematics at times share and refine each other’s techniques, and set theory itself has been revised on numerous occasions to work within a given school. In the third chapter, we look more closely at each of the philosophical questions posed by each school and determine how Platonism is used in articulating or solving the problem. From the offset we see in logicism the axiom of comprehension and impredicative definitions as Platonic concepts. We even see mathematicians of other schools criticizing logicists as being too Platonic. ‘Type theory,’ the lasting contribution of the logicists, is Platonic since it leads to a class of hierarchies associated with mathematical objects, to avoid loops and paradoxes. The empirical and naturalistic focus iii of nominalism as a way of avoiding naming ‘universals’ has in its approach inherent Platonism, especially in its use of set theory and logicists’ notation to construct new formal systems to achieve such a goal. Quine’s initial critique of claiming there was essentially no distinction between subject and object in logic sounds very Platonic. The intuitionist constructs universal mathematical objects from some of the same Platonic tools used by the nominalists. The formalists with their whole metamathematics program introducing an entirely new idea to the study of mathematics, however finitary they want it to be, are very Platonic, with their focus on the structure of math sentences. Set theory, with its emphasis on the infinite, axioms of choice, and ability to describe all of mathematics, is the most Platonic of them all. Important to note is how set theory is used in all branches of math as well as all foundations of mathematics. In the conclusions of the thesis, we enumerate the key Platonic ideas inherent in modern mathematics. We trace these ideas through time and see how they ended up as basic mathematical objects. Then we show how maieutics and dialectics lead to the notion of provability, especially in foundational schools such as logicism and formalism. Logos and knowledge, from the world of the intelligible, fall in line with intuitionists’ prescription of mathematics as being primarily a mental activity and with the nominalists’ requirement that logic describe natural reality. Thus talking about infinity does indeed complicate the tasks of the nominalists, but there are many ways to describe reality. Finally, we cite Godel as an example of a Platonist who made contributions to all areas of mathematics. He used logicist methodology in his incompleteness theorems to show that it is impossible to prove all the truths of a theory within the given theory. Logic iv must be somehow extended to capture all truths, and this extension cannot be just by merely adding new axioms. Godel constructed a true but unprovable mathematical sentence, using the diagonalization method that Cantor used to show the uncountability of real numbers. The intuitionist Brouwer constructed mathematical objects that were not only used by formalists, but were actually applied to solve real world phenomena. All too often mathematics follows the vicious-circle principle. And this vicious-circle principle is the Platonism that is inherent in all mathematics. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter One: Platonism Defined ................................................................................... 1 Part One: Basic Key Concepts ........................................................................... 1 Ideas and Universal Quantifiers ................................................................ 1 Maiuetics ................................................................................................... 3 Induction ................................................................................................... 5 Dialectics ................................................................................................... 6 General Definition .................................................................................... 8 Part Two: Forms and Logos ............................................................................... 9 Part Three: Knowledge and Logos .................................................................. 15 Chapter Two: The Five Philosophical Schools of Mathematics .................................. 20 Part One: The Origin and Development of Logicism 20 Critics of Logicism ................................................................................. 23 Nominalism . ............................................................................................ 24 Quine’s Semantics ................................................................................... 25 Part Two: Intuitionism ..................................................................................... 27 Intuitionistic Logic .................................................................................. 33 From Intuition to Construction ............................................................... 34 Part Three: Formalism ..................................................................................... 34 Formalist Logic ....................................................................................... 35 Part Four: Set Theory ....................................................................................... 38 Zermelo-Fraenkel Axioms ...................................................................... 39 The Bourbaki School .............................................................................. 39 Cantor’s Set Theory ................................................................................ 40 Chapter Three: Mathematical Platonism in Each School ............................................ 42 Part One: Logicism as Platonism ..................................................................... 44 Logicism ................................................................................................. 44 Type Theory ............................................................................................ 46 Part Two: Platonic Nominalism ....................................................................... 47 Nominalism ............................................................................................. 47 Naming Universals .................................................................................. 48 Part Three: Platonic Formalism ....................................................................... 51 Hilbert’s Program ...................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Nominalism, Trivialism, Logicism
    Nominalism, Trivialism, Logicism Agustín Rayo∗ May 1, 2014 This paper is an effort to extract some of the main theses in the philosophy of mathematics from my book, The Construction of Logical Space. I show that there are important limits to the availability of nominalistic paraphrase-functions for mathematical languages, and sug- gest a way around the problem by developing a method for specifying nominalistic contents without corresponding nominalistic paraphrases. Although much of the material in this paper is drawn from the book—and from an earlier paper (Rayo 2008)—I hope the present discussion will earn its keep by motivating the ideas in a new way, and by suggesting further applications. 1 Nominalism Mathematical Nominalism is the view that there are no mathematical objets. A standard problem for nominalists is that it is not obvious that they can explain what the point of a mathematical assertion would be. For it is natural to think that mathematical sentences like ‘the number of the dinosaurs is zero’ or ‘1 + 1 = 2’ can only be true if mathematical objects exist. But if this is right, the nominalist is committed to the view that such sentences are untrue. And if the sentences are untrue, it not immediately obvious why they would be worth asserting. ∗For their many helpful comments, I am indebted to Vann McGee, Kevin Richardson, Bernhard Salow and two anonymous referees for Philosophia Mathematica. I would also like to thank audiences at Smith College, the Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele, and MIT’s Logic, Langauge, Metaphysics and Mind Reading Group. Most of all, I would like to thank Steve Yablo.
    [Show full text]
  • Biography Paper – Georg Cantor
    Mike Garkie Math 4010 – History of Math UCD Denver 4/1/08 Biography Paper – Georg Cantor Few mathematicians are house-hold names; perhaps only Newton and Euclid would qualify. But there is a second tier of mathematicians, those whose names might not be familiar, but whose discoveries are part of everyday math. Examples here are Napier with logarithms, Cauchy with limits and Georg Cantor (1845 – 1918) with sets. In fact, those who superficially familier with Georg Cantor probably have two impressions of the man: First, as a consequence of thinking about sets, Cantor developed a theory of the actual infinite. And second, that Cantor was a troubled genius, crippled by Freudian conflict and mental illness. The first impression is fundamentally true. Cantor almost single-handedly overturned the Aristotle’s concept of the potential infinite by developing the concept of transfinite numbers. And, even though Bolzano and Frege made significant contributions, “Set theory … is the creation of one person, Georg Cantor.” [4] The second impression is mostly false. Cantor certainly did suffer from mental illness later in his life, but the other emotional baggage assigned to him is mostly due his early biographers, particularly the infamous E.T. Bell in Men Of Mathematics [7]. In the racially charged atmosphere of 1930’s Europe, the sensational story mathematician who turned the idea of infinity on its head and went crazy in the process, probably make for good reading. The drama of the controversy over Cantor’s ideas only added spice. 1 Fortunately, modern scholars have corrected the errors and biases in older biographies.
    [Show full text]
  • On Mathematical Problem Posing*
    On Mathematical Problem Posing* EDWARD A. SILVER In mathematics classes at all levels of schooling in all itself an exercise in exploring, conjecturing, examining, and countries of the world, students can be observed solving testing-all aspects of problem solving .. 1 asks should be problems .. The quality and authenticity of these mathemat­ created and presented that are accessible to students and ics problems has been the subject of many discussions and ~xtend their knowledge of mathematics and problem solv­ debates in recent years. Much of this attention has resulted ing. Students should be given opportunities to formulate in a rich, more diverse collection of problems being incor­ problems from given situations and create new problems by porated into school mathematics curricula. Although the modifying the conditions of a given problem [NCIM, problems themselves have received much scrutiny, less 1991, p. 95] attention has been paid to diversifying the sources for the Despite this interest, however, there is no coherent, com­ problems that students are asked to consider in school Stu­ prehensive account of problem posing as a prut of mathe­ dents are almost always asked to solve only the problems matics curriculum and instruction nor has there been sys­ that have been presented by a teacher or a textbook Stu­ tematic research on mathematical problem posing [Kil­ dents are rarely, if ever, given opportunities to pose in patrick, 1987] For the past several years, I have been some public way their own mathematics problems. Tradi­ working with colleagues and students on a number of tional transmission/reception models of mathematics investigations into various aspects of problem posing .
    [Show full text]
  • Our Conceptual Understanding of a Phenomenon, While the Logic of Induction Adds Quantitative Details to the Conceptual Knowledge
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 376 173 TM 021 982 AUTHOR Ho, Yu Chong TITLE Abduction? Deduction? Induction? Is There a Logic of Exploratory Data Analysis? PUB DATE Apr 94 NOTE 28p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (New Orleans, LA, April 4-8, 1994). PUB TYPE Reports Descriptive (141) Speeches/Conference Papers (150) EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Comprehension; *Deduction; Hypothesis Testing; *Induction; *Logic IDENTIFIERS *Abductive Reasoning; *Exploratory Data Analysis; Peirce (Charles S) ABSTRACT The philosophical notions introduced by Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) are helpfu: for researchers in understanding the nature of knowledge and reality. In the Peircean logical system, the logic of abduction and deduction contribute to our conceptual understanding of a phenomenon, while the logic of induction adds quantitative details to the conceptual knowledge. Although Peirce justified the validity of induction as a self-corrective process, he asserted that neither induction nor deduction can help us to unveil the internal structure of meaning. As exploratory data analysis performs the function of a model builder for confirmatory data analysis, abduction plays the role of explorer of viable paths to further inquiry. Thus, the logic of abduction fits well into exploratory data analysis. At the stage of abduction, the goal is to explore the data, find out a pattern, and suggest a plausible hypothesis; deduction is to refine the hypothesis based upon other plausible premises; and induction is the empirical substantiation. (Contains 55 references.) (Author) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. is *********************************************************************** Abduction? Deduction? Induction? Is there a Logic of Exploratory Data Analysis? Yu Chong Ho University of Oklahoma Internet: [email protected] April 4, 1994 U S.
    [Show full text]
  • Ludwig.Wittgenstein.-.Philosophical.Investigations.Pdf
    PHILOSOPHICAL INVESTIGATIONS By LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN Translated by G. E. M. ANSCOMBE BASIL BLACKWELL TRANSLATOR'S NOTE Copyright © Basil Blackwell Ltd 1958 MY acknowledgments are due to the following, who either checked First published 1953 Second edition 1958 the translation or allowed me to consult them about German and Reprint of English text alone 1963 Austrian usage or read the translation through and helped me to Third edition of English and German text with index 1967 improve the English: Mr. R. Rhees, Professor G. H. von Wright, Reprint of English text with index 1968, 1972, 1974, 1976, 1978, Mr. P. Geach, Mr. G. Kreisel, Miss L. Labowsky, Mr. D. Paul, Miss I. 1981, 1986 Murdoch. Basil Blackwell Ltd 108 Cowley Road, Oxford, OX4 1JF, UK All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purposes of criticism and review, no part of this publication may be NOTE TO SECOND EDITION reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or THE text has been revised for the new edition. A large number of otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. small changes have been made in the English text. The following passages have been significantly altered: Except in the United States of America, this book is sold to the In Part I: §§ 108, 109, 116, 189, 193, 251, 284, 352, 360, 393,418, condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re- 426, 442, 456, 493, 520, 556, 582, 591, 644, 690, 692.
    [Show full text]
  • NSP4 Pragmatist Kant
    Nordic NSP Studies in Pragmatism Helsinki — 2019 Giovanni Maddalena “Anti-Kantianism as a Necessary Characteristic of Pragmatism” In: Krzysztof Piotr Skowronski´ and Sami Pihlstrom¨ (Eds.) (2019). Pragmatist Kant—Pragmatism, Kant, and Kantianism in the Twenty-first Century (pp. 43–59). Nordic Studies in Pragmatism 4. Helsinki: Nordic Pragmatism Network. issn-l 1799-3954 issn 1799-3954 isbn 978-952-67497-3-0 Copyright c 2019 The Authors and the Nordic Pragmatism Network. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. CC BY NC For more information, see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ Nordic Pragmatism Network, NPN Helsinki 2019 www.nordprag.org Anti-Kantianism as a Necessary Characteristic of Pragmatism Giovanni Maddalena Universit`adel Molise 1. Introduction Pragmatists declared their anti-Cartesianism at the first appearance of the movement, in Peirce’s series on cognition written for the Journal of Specu- lative Philosophy (1867–8). As is well known, the brilliant young scientist characterized Cartesian doubt as a “paper doubt”, by opposing it to sci- entists’ true “living doubt” (Peirce 1998 [1868], 115).1 Some readers have not understood the powerful novelty that his opposition to Cartesianism implies. According to Peirce, research does not proceed from skeptical, “paper” doubt. For Peirce, doubt is possible because of a previous cer- tainty, a position which is similar to the one held by Augustine (Augustine 1970). Research moves from one certainty to another; the abandonment of an initial certainty is only reasonable in the presence of a real and surprising phenomenon that alters one of the pillars on which it stands.
    [Show full text]
  • Explanations
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. CHAPTER 1 Explanations 1.1 SALLIES Language is an instrument of Logic, but not an indispensable instrument. Boole 1847a, 118 We know that mathematicians care no more for logic than logicians for mathematics. The two eyes of exact science are mathematics and logic; the mathematical sect puts out the logical eye, the logical sect puts out the mathematical eye; each believing that it sees better with one eye than with two. De Morgan 1868a,71 That which is provable, ought not to be believed in science without proof. Dedekind 1888a, preface If I compare arithmetic with a tree that unfolds upwards in a multitude of techniques and theorems whilst the root drives into the depthswx . Frege 1893a, xiii Arithmetic must be discovered in just the same sense in which Columbus discovered the West Indies, and we no more create numbers than he created the Indians. Russell 1903a, 451 1.2 SCOPE AND LIMITS OF THE BOOK 1.2.1 An outline history. The story told here from §3 onwards is re- garded as well known. It begins with the emergence of set theory in the 1870s under the inspiration of Georg Cantor, and the contemporary development of mathematical logic by Gottlob Frege andŽ. especially Giuseppe Peano. A cumulation of these and some related movements was achieved in the 1900s with the philosophy of mathematics proposed by Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell.
    [Show full text]
  • Constructivity in Homotopy Type Theory
    Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy Constructivity in Homotopy Type Theory Author: Supervisors: Maximilian Doré Prof. Dr. Dr. Hannes Leitgeb Prof. Steve Awodey, PhD Munich, August 2019 Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Logic and Philosophy of Science contents Contents 1 Introduction1 1.1 Outline................................ 3 1.2 Open Problems ........................... 4 2 Judgements and Propositions6 2.1 Judgements ............................. 7 2.2 Propositions............................. 9 2.2.1 Dependent types...................... 10 2.2.2 The logical constants in HoTT .............. 11 2.3 Natural Numbers.......................... 13 2.4 Propositional Equality....................... 14 2.5 Equality, Revisited ......................... 17 2.6 Mere Propositions and Propositional Truncation . 18 2.7 Universes and Univalence..................... 19 3 Constructive Logic 22 3.1 Brouwer and the Advent of Intuitionism ............ 22 3.2 Heyting and Kolmogorov, and the Formalization of Intuitionism 23 3.3 The Lambda Calculus and Propositions-as-types . 26 3.4 Bishop’s Constructive Mathematics................ 27 4 Computational Content 29 4.1 BHK in Homotopy Type Theory ................. 30 4.2 Martin-Löf’s Meaning Explanations ............... 31 4.2.1 The meaning of the judgments.............. 32 4.2.2 The theory of expressions................. 34 4.2.3 Canonical forms ...................... 35 4.2.4 The validity of the types.................. 37 4.3 Breaking Canonicity and Propositional Canonicity . 38 4.3.1 Breaking canonicity .................... 39 4.3.2 Propositional canonicity.................. 40 4.4 Proof-theoretic Semantics and the Meaning Explanations . 40 5 Constructive Identity 44 5.1 Identity in Martin-Löf’s Meaning Explanations......... 45 ii contents 5.1.1 Intensional type theory and the meaning explanations 46 5.1.2 Extensional type theory and the meaning explanations 47 5.2 Homotopical Interpretation of Identity ............
    [Show full text]
  • Download Article (PDF)
    Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 104 2nd Annual International Seminar on Transformative Education and Educational Leadership (AISTEEL 2017) Development of Learning Devices Oriented Problem Based Learning to Increase Student’s Combinatorial Thinking in Mathematical Problem Solving Ability Ammamiarihta Department of Mathematics Education Universitas Negeri Medan Medan, Indonesia Corresponding Email: [email protected] Edi Syahputra Department of Mathematics Education Universitas Negeri Medan Medan, Indonesia Edy Surya Department of Mathematics Education Universitas Negeri Medan Medan, Indonesia Abstract–This research study is research and students, and learn the initial knowledge of students, all this development learning devices. This study aimed to describe will unravel its implementation in the learning device[1]. how the validity, practically, and effectiveness of learning Learning devices should not only provide materials devices oriented of problem based learning which is developed instantly, but be able to lead students to the ability to and knowing about increase students’ combinatorial thinking understand learned concepts. It aims to determine the extent in mathematical problem solving ability after using learning to which learning devices have been presented, what devices which is developed. The product that produce in this indicators to be achieved, to how the follow-up will be done study is lesson plan, handbook’s teacher, student’s book, and by the teacher. worksheet. Learning devices development using 4D model which developed by Thiagarajan, Semmel and Semmel with In the development of quality learning devices need four step, that is define, design, develop and disseminate. This an assessment of products developed. In order to make the study was conducted in two trials in two different class .
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of Mathematical Logic from Russell to Tarski: 1900–1935
    The Development of Mathematical Logic from Russell to Tarski: 1900–1935 Paolo Mancosu Richard Zach Calixto Badesa The Development of Mathematical Logic from Russell to Tarski: 1900–1935 Paolo Mancosu (University of California, Berkeley) Richard Zach (University of Calgary) Calixto Badesa (Universitat de Barcelona) Final Draft—May 2004 To appear in: Leila Haaparanta, ed., The Development of Modern Logic. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004 Contents Contents i Introduction 1 1 Itinerary I: Metatheoretical Properties of Axiomatic Systems 3 1.1 Introduction . 3 1.2 Peano’s school on the logical structure of theories . 4 1.3 Hilbert on axiomatization . 8 1.4 Completeness and categoricity in the work of Veblen and Huntington . 10 1.5 Truth in a structure . 12 2 Itinerary II: Bertrand Russell’s Mathematical Logic 15 2.1 From the Paris congress to the Principles of Mathematics 1900–1903 . 15 2.2 Russell and Poincar´e on predicativity . 19 2.3 On Denoting . 21 2.4 Russell’s ramified type theory . 22 2.5 The logic of Principia ......................... 25 2.6 Further developments . 26 3 Itinerary III: Zermelo’s Axiomatization of Set Theory and Re- lated Foundational Issues 29 3.1 The debate on the axiom of choice . 29 3.2 Zermelo’s axiomatization of set theory . 32 3.3 The discussion on the notion of “definit” . 35 3.4 Metatheoretical studies of Zermelo’s axiomatization . 38 4 Itinerary IV: The Theory of Relatives and Lowenheim’s¨ Theorem 41 4.1 Theory of relatives and model theory . 41 4.2 The logic of relatives .
    [Show full text]
  • An Unexplored Aspect of Following a Rule by Rachael Elizabeth Driver
    An Unexplored Aspect of Following a Rule by Rachael Elizabeth Driver Bachelor of Science, University of New South Wales, 2001 Bachelor of Liberal Studies (Honours), University of Sydney, 2006 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Dietrich School of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2020 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH DIETRICH SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES This dissertation was presented by Rachael Elizabeth Driver It was defended on July 27, 2020 and approved by Robert Batterman, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy Warren Goldfarb, Walter Beverly Pearson Professor of Modern Mathematics and Mathematical Logic, Harvard University Erica Shumener, Assistant Professor of Philosophy Dissertation Co-Directors: Thomas Ricketts, Professor of Philosophy Mark Wilson, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy ii Copyright © by Rachael Elizabeth Driver 2020 iii An Unexplored Aspect of Following a Rule Rachael Elizabeth Driver, PhD University of Pittsburgh, 2020 Though Wittgenstein has been most often identified as opposing Platonism in his writings about mathematics, I argue that Wittgenstein’s radical contextualism about mathematics finds its most natural opponent not in Platonism, but in a variety of formalism. One of Wittgenstein’s obvious formalist targets is his colleague the mathematician G. H. Hardy. If we discard this—still influential—picture of mathematics and replace it with a more nuanced account of mathematical activity as exemplified in the metamathematical thinking of the nineteenth century mathematician Augustus De Morgan, the example of the wayward pupil takes on a different significance. Against a more complex background, the wayward pupil can be reinterpreted as representing an exemplar of mathematical discovery.
    [Show full text]
  • The Proper Explanation of Intuitionistic Logic: on Brouwer's Demonstration
    The proper explanation of intuitionistic logic: on Brouwer’s demonstration of the Bar Theorem Göran Sundholm, Mark van Atten To cite this version: Göran Sundholm, Mark van Atten. The proper explanation of intuitionistic logic: on Brouwer’s demonstration of the Bar Theorem. van Atten, Mark Heinzmann, Gerhard Boldini, Pascal Bourdeau, Michel. One Hundred Years of Intuitionism (1907-2007). The Cerisy Conference, Birkhäuser, pp.60- 77, 2008, 978-3-7643-8652-8. halshs-00791550 HAL Id: halshs-00791550 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00791550 Submitted on 24 Jan 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial| 4.0 International License The proper explanation of intuitionistic logic: on Brouwer’s demonstration of the Bar Theorem Göran Sundholm Philosophical Institute, Leiden University, P.O. Box 2315, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands. [email protected] Mark van Atten SND (CNRS / Paris IV), 1 rue Victor Cousin, 75005 Paris, France. [email protected] Der … geführte Beweis scheint mir aber trotzdem . Basel: Birkhäuser, 2008, 60–77. wegen der in seinem Gedankengange enthaltenen Aussagen Interesse zu besitzen. (Brouwer 1927B, n. 7)1 Brouwer’s demonstration of his Bar Theorem gives rise to provocative ques- tions regarding the proper explanation of the logical connectives within intu- itionistic and constructivist frameworks, respectively, and, more generally, re- garding the role of logic within intuitionism.
    [Show full text]