We hold these truths to be self-evident: But what do we mean by that?

Review of Symbolic Logic 2 (1):175-207 (2009)
Abstract
At the beginning of Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik (§2) [1884], Frege observes that “it is in the nature of mathematics to prefer proof, where proof is possible”. This, of course, is true, but thinkers differ on why it is that mathematicians prefer proof. And what of propositions for which no proof is possible? What of axioms? This talk explores various notions of self-evidence, and the role they play in various foundational systems, notably those of Frege and Zermelo. I argue that both programs are undermined at a crucial point, namely when self-evidence is supported by holistic and even pragmatic considerations.
Keywords self-evidence   mathematics   proofs   toread
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: 10,337
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
George Boolos (1989). Iteration Again. Philosophical Topics 17 (2):5-21.

View all 26 references

Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-05-29

Total downloads

137 ( #5,664 of 1,096,606 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

11 ( #14,645 of 1,096,606 )

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.