Graduate studies at Western
The Review of Symbolic Logic 5 (4):687-709 (2012)
|Abstract||In the philosophy of mathematics, indispensability arguments aim to show that we are justiﬁed in believing that abstract mathematical objects exist. I wish to defend a particular objection to such arguments that has become increasingly popular recently. It is called instrumental nominalism. I consider the recent versions of this view and conclude that it has yet to be given an adequate formulation. I provide such a formulation and show that it can be used to answer the indispensability arguments. There are two main indispensability arguments in the literature, though one has received nearly all of the attention. They correspond to two ways in which we use mathematics in science and in everyday life. We use mathematical language to help us describe non-mathematical reality; and we use mathematical reasoning to help us perform inferences concerning non-mathematical reality using only a feasible amount of cognitive power. The former use is the starting point of the Quine-Putnam indispensability argument ([Quine, 1980a], [Quine, 1980b], [Quine, 1981a], [Quine, 1981b], [Putnam, 1979a], [Putnam, 1979b]); the latter provides the basis for Ketland’s more recent argument ([Ketland, 2005]). I begin by considering the Quine-Putnam argument and introduce instrumental nominalism to defuse it. Then I show that Ketland’s argument can be defused in a similar way.|
|Keywords||nominalism Pettigrew indispensability WAYS toread|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
David Liggins (2008). Quine, Putnam, and the 'Quine-Putnam' Indispensability Argument. Erkenntnis 68 (1):113 - 127.
Lieven Decock (2002). Quine's Weak and Strong Indispensability Argument. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 33 (2):231-250.
Pieranna Garavaso (2005). On Frege's Alleged Indispensability Argument. Philosophia Mathematica 13 (2):160-173.
Russell Marcus (2007). Numbers Without Science. Dissertation, The Graduate School and University Center of the City University of New York
Otávio Bueno (2003). Quine's Double Standard: Undermining the Indispensability Argument Via the Indeterminacy of Reference. Principia 7 (1-2):17-39.
Mark Colyvan (1998). In Defence of Indispensability. Philosophia Mathematica 6 (1):39-62.
Patrick S. Dieveney (2007). Dispensability in the Indispensability Argument. Synthese 157 (1):105 - 128.
Sam Baron (2013). A Truthmaker Indispensability Argument. Synthese 190 (12):2413-2427.
Mitchell O. Stokes (2007). Van Inwagen and the Quine-Putnam Indispensability Argument. Erkenntnis 67 (3):439 - 453.
Anne Newstead & James Franklin (2012). Indispensability Without Platonism. In Alexander Bird, Brian Ellis & Howard Sankey (eds.), Properties, Powers and Structures. Routledge.
Anthony Peressini (1999). Confirming Mathematical Theories: An Ontologically Agnostic Stance. Synthese 118 (2):257-277.
Feng Ye (2011). Naturalism and Abstract Entities. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (2):129-146.
Sorin Ioan Bangu (2008). Inference to the Best Explanation and Mathematical Realism. Synthese 160 (1):13-20.
Added to index2011-09-04
Total downloads55 ( #22,161 of 754,610 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #15,143 of 754,610 )
How can I increase my downloads?