Noûs 45 (2):345-374 (2011)
|Abstract||A number of people have recently argued for a structural approach to accounting for the applications of mathematics. Such an approach has been called “the mapping account”. According to this view, the applicability of mathematics is fully accounted for by appreciating the relevant structural similarities between the empirical system under study and the mathematics used in the investigation of that system. This account of applications requires the truth of applied mathematical assertions, but it does not require the existence of mathematical objects. In this paper, we discuss the shortcomings of this account, and show how these shortcomings can be overcome by a broader view of the application of mathematics: the inferential conception|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Otavio Bueno (2005). Dirac and the Dispensability of Mathematics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 36 (3):465-490.
Alan Baker (2003). The Indispensability Argument and Multiple Foundations for Mathematics. Philosophical Quarterly 53 (210):49–67.
Christopher Pincock (2009). Towards a Philosophy of Applied Mathematics. In Otávio Bueno & Øystein Linnebo (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Mathematics. Palgrave Macmillan.
Robert A. Holland (1992). Apriority and Applied Mathematics. Synthese 92 (3):349 - 370.
Davide Rizza (2010). Mathematical Nominalism and Measurement. Philosophia Mathematica 18 (1):53-73.
Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (2006). Arithmetic and Ontology: A Non-Realist Philosophy of Arithmetic. rodopi.
O. Bueno & S. French (2012). Can Mathematics Explain Physical Phenomena? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (1):85-113.
Added to index2009-03-04
Total downloads64 ( #14,379 of 551,007 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #15,270 of 551,007 )
How can I increase my downloads?