Burgess's ‘scientific’ arguments for the existence of mathematical objects
Philosophia Mathematica 14 (3):318-337 (2006)
Abstract |
This paper addresses John Burgess's answer to the ‘Benacerraf Problem’: How could we come justifiably to believe anything implying that there are numbers, given that it does not make sense to ascribe location or causal powers to numbers? Burgess responds that we should look at how mathematicians come to accept: There are prime numbers greater than 1010 That, according to Burgess, is how one can come justifiably to believe something implying that there are numbers. This paper investigates what lies behind Burgess's answer and ends up as a rebuttal to Burgess's reasoning.
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.1093/philmat/nkl005 |
Options |
Save to my reading list
![]() ![]() |


No references found.

No citations found.

The Burgess-Rosen Critique of Nominalistic Reconstructions.Charles Chihara - 2006 - Philosophia Mathematica 15 (1):54--78.
Charles Parsons. Mathematical Thought and its Objects.John P. Burgess - 2008 - Philosophia Mathematica 16 (3):402-409.
Review: Constructibility and Mathematical Existence by Charles S. Chihara. [REVIEW]John P. Burgess - 1992 - Philosophical Review 101:916-918.
Is There a Good Epistemological Argument Against Platonism?David Liggins - 2006 - Analysis 66 (2):135–141.
What Mathematicians' Claims Mean : In Defense of Hermeneutic Fictionalism.Gábor Forrai - 2010 - Hungarian Philosophical Review 54 (4):191-203.
Burgess's `Scientific' Arguments for the Existence of Mathematical Objects.Charles S. Chihara - 2006 - Philosophia Mathematica 14 (3):318-337.
Added to PP index
2009-01-28
Total downloads
30 ( #192,197 of 2,226,009 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #428,364 of 2,226,009 )
2009-01-28
Total downloads
30 ( #192,197 of 2,226,009 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #428,364 of 2,226,009 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Monthly downloads
