Philosophia Mathematica 8 (3):225-243 (2000)
|Abstract||A distinction between the epistemic practices in mathematics and in the empirical sciences is rehearsed to motivate the epistemic role puzzle. This is distinguished both from Benacerraf's 1973 epistemic puzzle and from sceptical arguments against our knowledge of an external world. The stipulationist position is described, a position which can address this puzzle. Methods of avoiding the stipulationist position by using pure logic to provide knowledge of mathematical abstracta are discussed and criticized|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
John Cantwell (2006). The Logic of Dominance Reasoning. Journal of Philosophical Logic 35 (1):41 - 63.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2008). Epistemic Logic and Epistemology. In Vincent F. Hendricks & Duncan Pritchard (eds.), New Waves in Epistemology. Palgrave Macmillan.
J. Väänänen (2007). Dependence Logic: A New Approach to Independence Friendly Logic. Cambridge University Press.
Kevin de Laplante, Certainty and Domain-Independence in the Sciences of Complexity: A Critique of James Franklin's Account of Formal Science.
Gabriel Uzquiano (2010). How to Solve the Hardest Logic Puzzle Ever in Two Questions. Analysis 70 (1):39-44.
Brian Rabern & Landon Rabern (2008). A Simple Solution to the Hardest Logic Puzzle Ever. [REVIEW] Analysis 68 (2):105-112.
Jody Azzouni (1994). Metaphysical Myths, Mathematical Practice: The Ontology and Epistemology of the Exact Sciences. Cambridge University Press.
Mark McEvoy (2012). Platonism and the 'Epistemic Role Puzzle'. Philosophia Mathematica 20 (3):289-304.
J. Gerbrandy (2007). The Surprise Examination in Dynamic Epistemic Logic. Synthese 155 (1):21 - 33.
Philip A. Ebert (2008). A Puzzle About Ontological Commitments. Philosophia Mathematica 16 (2):209-226.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #53,763 of 548,983 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,320 of 548,983 )
How can I increase my downloads?