David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45 (3):789-813 (1994)
Can visual thinking be a means of discovery in elementary analysis, as well as a means of illustration and a stimulus to discovery? The answer to the corresponding question for geometry and arithmetic seems to be ‘yes’ (Giaquinto , ), and so a positive answer might be expected for elementary analysis too. But I argue here that only in a severely restricted range of cases can visual thinking be a means of discovery in analysis. Examination of persuasive visual routes to two simple theorems (Rolle, Bolzano) shows that they are not ways of discovering the theorems; the type of visual thinking involved can never be used to discover analytic theorems of a certain generality. The hypothesis that visual thinking is never a means of discovering the existence or nature of the limit of some infinite process is considered, and a likely counter-example is set out. It is still possible that restricted theorems can be discovered visually: an example from Littlewood is examined in detail and not found wanting. Even when visual thinking is not a means of discovery it can provide the idea for a proof in a direct way; an example is presented (Intermediate Value Theorem). In conclusion: it may be possible to discover theorems in elementary real analysis by visual means, but only theorems of a restricted kind; however, visual thinking in analysis can be very useful in other ways.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
David Sherry (2009). The Role of Diagrams in Mathematical Arguments. Foundations of Science 14 (1-2):59-74.
Kajsa Bråting & Johanna Pejlare (2008). Visualizations in Mathematics. Erkenntnis 68 (3):345 - 358.
Dominique Tournès (2012). Diagrams in the Theory of Differential Equations (Eighteenth to Nineteenth Centuries). Synthese 186 (1):257-288.
Similar books and articles
Gregory Francis & Frouke Hermens (2002). Comment on Competition for Consciousness Among Visual Events: The Psychophysics of Reentrant Visual Processes (di Lollo, Enns & Rensink, 2000). Journal of Experimental Psychology 131 (4):590-593.
Mohan Matthen (2007). Defining Vision: What Homology Thinking Contributes. Biology and Philosophy 22 (5):675-689.
Don Fawkes (2003). Critically Thinking Through Visual Arts. Inquiry 22 (4):13-25.
Andrew Arana (2009). Visual Thinking in Mathematics • by Marcus Giaquinto. Analysis 69 (2):401-403.
Andrew Arana (2009). Review of M. Giaquinto's Visual Thinking in Mathematics. [REVIEW] Analysis 69:401-403.
Rudolf Arnheim (1970). Visual Thinking. London,Faber.
Mohan P. Matthen (2006). On Visual Experience of Objects: Comments on John Campbell's Reference and Consciousness. Philosophical Studies 127 (2):195-220.
Andrew E. Benjamin (ed.) (1995). Complexity: Architecture, Art, Philosophy. Distributed to the Trade in the United States of America by National Book Network.
V. di Lollo, James T. Enns & R. Rensink (2000). Competition for Consciousness Among Visual Events: The Psychophysics of Reentrant Visual Processes. Journal Of Experimental Psychology-General 129 (4):481-507.
M. Giaquinto (2007). Visual Thinking in Mathematics: An Epistemological Study. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads34 ( #60,241 of 1,679,387 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #183,003 of 1,679,387 )
How can I increase my downloads?