A Case For The Utility Of The Mathematical Intermediates

Philosophia Mathematica 20 (2):200-223 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Many have argued against the claim that Plato posited the mathematical objects that are the subjects of Metaphysics M and N. This paper shifts the burden of proof onto these objectors to show that Plato did not posit these entities. It does so by making two claims: first, that Plato should posit the mathematical Intermediates because Forms and physical objects are ill suited in comparison to Intermediates to serve as the objects of mathematics; second, that their utility, combined with Aristotle’s commentary on Plato’s posit of Intermediates, provides good reason to conclude that Plato did posit them

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-03-25

Downloads
65 (#225,534)

6 months
4 (#319,344)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Mathematics, Mental Imagery, and Ontology: A New Interpretation of the Divided Line.Miriam Byrd - 2018 - International Journal of the Platonic Tradition 12 (2):111-131.
Mathematical Substances in Aristotle’s Metaphysics B.5: Aporia 12 Revisited.Emily Katz - 2018 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 100 (2):113-145.
Hypothetical Inquiry in Plato's Timaeus.Jonathan Edward Griffiths - 2023 - Ancient Philosophy Today 5 (2):156-177.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references