Graduate studies at Western
Philosophia Mathematica 6 (1):63-84 (1998)
|Abstract||A response is given here to Benacerraf's (1965) non-uniqueness (or multiple-reductions) objection to mathematical platonism. It is argued that non-uniqueness is simply not a problem for platonism; more specifically, it is argued that platonists can simply embrace non-uniqueness—i.e., that one can endorse the thesis that our mathematical theories truly describe collections of abstract mathematical objects while rejecting the thesis that such theories truly describe unique collections of such objects. I also argue that part of the motivation for this stance is that it dovetails with the correct response to Benacerraf's other objection to platonism, i.e., his (1973) epistemological objection.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Colin Cheyne (1999). Problems with Profligate Platonism. Philosophia Mathematica 7 (2):164-177.
Nancy R. Howell (2008). Uniqueness in Context. Zygon 43 (2):493-503.
Jonathan Matheson (2011). The Case for Rational Uniqueness. Logic and Episteme 2 (3):359-373.
Mark Balaguer (1994). Against (Maddian) Naturalized Platonism. Philosophia Mathematica 2 (2):97-108.
Mark Balaguer (1998). Platonism and Anti-Platonism in Mathematics. Oxford University Press.
Brent Mundy (1991). Embedding and Uniqueness in Relationist Theories. Philosophy of Science 58 (1):102-124.
Mark Balaguer (1995). A Platonist Epistemology. Synthese 103 (3):303 - 325.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads29 ( #48,197 of 740,090 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,960 of 740,090 )
How can I increase my downloads?