Why do mathematicians re-prove theorems?

Philosophia Mathematica 14 (3):269-286 (2006)
Abstract
From ancient times to the present, the discovery and presentation of new proofs of previously established theorems has been a salient feature of mathematical practice. Why? What purposes are served by such endeavors? And how do mathematicians judge whether two proofs of the same theorem are essentially different? Consideration of such questions illuminates the roles that proofs play in the validation and communication of mathematical knowledge and raises issues that have yet to be resolved by mathematical logicians. The Appendix, in which several proofs of the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic are compared, provides a miniature case study.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 10,750
External links
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
Alexander Paseau (2011). Proofs of the Compactness Theorem. History and Philosophy of Logic 31 (1):73-98.
S. Pollard (2013). Mathematics and the Good Life. Philosophia Mathematica 21 (1):93-109.
Similar books and articles
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

50 ( #31,740 of 1,098,907 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

9 ( #22,384 of 1,098,907 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.