The Social Constitution of Mathematical Knowledge: Objectivity, Semantics, and Axiomatics

In Bharath Sriraman (ed.), Handbook of the History and Philosophy of Mathematical Practice. Cham: Springer. pp. 2847-2877 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The philosophy of mathematical practice sometimes investigates the social constitution of mathematics but does not always make explicit the philosophical-normative framework that guides the discussion. This chapter investigates some recent proposals in the philosophy of mathematical practice that compare social facts and mathematical objects, discussing similarities and differences. An attempt will be made to identify, through a comparison with three different perspectives in social ontology, the kind of objectivity attributed to mathematical knowledge, the type of representational or non-representational semantics adopted, and the justificatory or coordinative role entrusted to axiomatics. After a brief introduction to key issues in social ontology, Sect. 3 of the chapter offers a survey of contributions by Feferman, Ferreirós, and Cole, highlighting a difference between approaches based on rules, practices, and intentional states, respectively. Section 4.1 also discusses results by Carter, Collin, Giardino, and Pantsar, focusing on differences between the objectivity of knowledge and objectivity of objects and showing that many authors combine a realist, structuralist, and pragmatist perspective, as well as the idea that objectivity comes in degrees. Section 4.2 focuses on the kind of semantics that is adopted in socially oriented approaches. A representational semantics is preferred by authors grounding their views on mental states, whereas a non-representational semantics best fits with views based on practices. Section 5 considers how axiomatics can be understood in a social perspective. Axiomatics generally plays a justificatory role also in theories that aim to explain the social constitution of mathematical knowledge. Yet, if one shifts from approaches based on mental states to approaches anchored on rules or habits, axiomatics can be viewed as an institution based on obligations, functions, coordination problems, and agent’s actions and roles, thus playing an organizational and coordination role.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,928

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Axiomatics Without Foundations. On the Model-theoretical Viewpoint In Modern Axiomatics.Johannes Lenhard - 2005 - Philosophia Scientiae 9 (2: Aperçus philosophiques en log):97-107.
Axiomatics: mathematical thought and high modernism.Alma Steingart - 2023 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hilbert's Objectivity.Lydia Patton - 2014 - Historia Mathematica 41 (2):188-203.
What's there to know? A Fictionalist Approach to Mathematical Knowledge.Mary Leng - 2007 - In Mary Leng, Alexander Paseau & Michael Potter (eds.), Mathematical Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Axiomatics and progress in the light of 20th century philosophy of science and mathematics.Dirk Schlimm - 2006 - In Benedikt Löwe, Volker Peckhaus & T. Rasch (eds.), Foundations of the Formal Sciences IV. College Publications. pp. 233–253.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-04-27

Downloads
2 (#1,804,667)

6 months
2 (#1,198,857)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Paola Cantù
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references