David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
History and Philosophy of Logic 28 (1):19-30 (2007)
I trace the development of arguments for the consistency of non-Euclidean geometries and for the independence of the parallel postulate, showing how the arguments become more rigorous as a formal conception of geometry is introduced. I analyze the kinds of arguments offered by Jules Hoüel in 1860-1870 for the unprovability of the parallel postulate and for the existence of non-Euclidean geometries, especially his reaction to the publication of Beltrami’s seminal papers, showing that Beltrami was much more concerned with the existence of non-Euclidean objects than he was with the formal consistency of non-Euclidean geometries. The final step towards rigorous consistency proofs is taken in the 1880s by Henri Poincaré. It is the formal conception of geometry, stripping the geometric primitive terms of their usual meanings, that allows the introduction of a modern fully rigorous consistency proof.
|Keywords||Beltrami geometry consistency|
|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
Gottlob Frege, Gottfried Gabriel, Brian Mcguinness & Hans Kaal (1982). Philosophical and Mathematical Correspondence. Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 172 (1):64-64.
John Mayberry (1986). Cantorian Set Theory and Limitation of Size. [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 36 (144):429-434.
Patricia A. Blanchette (1996). Frege and Hilbert on Consistency. Journal of Philosophy 93 (7):317-336.
Michael David Resnik (1974). The Frege-Hilbert Controversy. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 34 (3):386-403.
Citations of this work BETA
Katherine Dunlop (2009). Why Euclid's Geometry Brooked No Doubt: J. H. Lambert on Certainty and the Existence of Models. Synthese 167 (1):33 - 65.
Katherine Dunlop (2009). Why Euclid’s Geometry Brooked No Doubt: J. H. Lambert on Certainty and the Existence of Models. Synthese 167 (1):33-65.
Similar books and articles
George Kafkoulis (1994). The Consistency Strength of an Infinitary Ramsey Property. Journal of Symbolic Logic 59 (4):1158-1195.
Paolo Liberatore (2007). Consistency Defaults. Studia Logica 86 (1):89 - 110.
Ricardo J. Gómez (1986). Beltrami's Kantian View of Non-Euclidean Geometry. Kant-Studien 77 (1-4):102-107.
Radhakrishnan Srinivasan, On the Logical Consistency of Special Relativity Theory and Non-Euclidean Geometries: Platonism Versus Formalism.
Geoffrey Hunter (1980). What Do the Consistency Proofs for Non-Euclidean Geometries Prove? Analysis 40 (2):79 - 83.
David Stump (1991). Poincaré's Thesis of the Translatability of Euclidean and Non-Euclidean Geometries. Noûs 25 (5):639-657.
J. Scanlan Michael (1988). Beltrami's Model and the Independence of the Parallel Postulate. History and Philosophy of Logic 9 (1):13-34.
Added to index2010-05-04
Total downloads16 ( #228,336 of 1,906,795 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #468,570 of 1,906,795 )
How can I increase my downloads?