Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Dedication
- Introduction
- 1 Truth and necessity in mathematics
- 2 The thesis that mathematics is logic
- 3 Mathematics without foundations
- 4 What is mathematical truth?
- 5 Philosophy of physics
- 6 An examination of Grünbaum's philosophy of geometry
- 7 A philosopher looks at quantum mechanics
- 8 Discussion: comments on comments on comments: a reply to Margenau and Wigner
- 9 Three-valued logic
- 10 The logic of quantum mechanics
- 11 Time and physical geometry
- 12 Memo on ‘conventionalism’
- 13 What theories are not
- 14 Craig's theorem
- 15 It ain't necessarily so
- 16 The ‘corroboration’ of theories
- 17 ‘Degree of confirmation’ and inductive logic
- 18 Probability and confirmation
- 19 On properties
- 20 Philosophy of Logic
- Bibliography
- Index
3 - Mathematics without foundations
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 August 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Dedication
- Introduction
- 1 Truth and necessity in mathematics
- 2 The thesis that mathematics is logic
- 3 Mathematics without foundations
- 4 What is mathematical truth?
- 5 Philosophy of physics
- 6 An examination of Grünbaum's philosophy of geometry
- 7 A philosopher looks at quantum mechanics
- 8 Discussion: comments on comments on comments: a reply to Margenau and Wigner
- 9 Three-valued logic
- 10 The logic of quantum mechanics
- 11 Time and physical geometry
- 12 Memo on ‘conventionalism’
- 13 What theories are not
- 14 Craig's theorem
- 15 It ain't necessarily so
- 16 The ‘corroboration’ of theories
- 17 ‘Degree of confirmation’ and inductive logic
- 18 Probability and confirmation
- 19 On properties
- 20 Philosophy of Logic
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
Philosophers and logicians have been so busy trying to provide mathematics with a ‘foundation’ in the past half-century that only rarely have a few timid voices dared to voice the suggestion that it does not need one. I wish here to urge with some seriousness the view of the timid voices. I don't think mathematics is unclear; I don't think mathematics has a crisis in its foundations; indeed, I do not believe mathematics either has or needs ‘foundations’. The much touted problems in the philosophy of mathematics seem to me, without exception, to be problems internal to the thought of various system builders. The systems are doubtless interesting as intellectual exercises; debate between the systems and research within the systems doubtless will and should continue; but I would like to convince you (of course I won't, but one can always hope) that the various systems of mathematical philosophy, without exception, need not be taken seriously.
By way of comparison, it may be salutory to consider the various ‘crises’ that philosophy has pretended to discover in the past. It is impressive to remember that at the turn of the century there was a large measure of agreement among philosophers – far more than there is now – on certain fundamentals. Virtually all philosophers were idealists of one sort or another. But even the nonidealists were in a large measure of agreement with the idealists. It was generally agreed any property of material objects – say, redness or length – could be ascribed to the object, if at all, only as a power to produce certain sorts of sensory experiences.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Mathematics, Matter and MethodPhilosophical Papers, pp. 43 - 59Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1979
- 6
- Cited by