Recalcitrant Disagreement in Mathematics: An “Endless and Depressing Controversy” in the History of Italian Algebraic Geometry

Global Philosophy 33 (38):1-29 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX


If there is an area of discourse in which disagreement is virtually absent, it is mathematics. After all, mathematicians justify their claims with deductive proofs: arguments that entail their conclusions. But is mathematics really exceptional in this respect? Looking at the history and practice of mathematics, we soon realize that it is not. First, deductive arguments must start somewhere. How should we choose the starting points (i.e., the axioms)? Second, mathematicians, like the rest of us, are fallible. Their ability to recognize whether a putative proof is correct is not infallible. In most cases, disagreement over the correctness of a putative proof is, however, evanescent. Once an error is spotted and communicated, the disagreement disappears. But this is not always the case. Sometimes it is recalcitrant; that is, it persists over time. In order to zoom in on this type of disagreement and explain its very possibility, we focus on a single case study: a decades-long (1921-1949) controversy between Federigo Enriques and Francesco Severi, two prominent exponents of the Italian school of algebraic geometry. We suggest that the instability of the mathematical community to which they belonged can be explained by the gap between an abstract criterion of rigor and local criteria of acceptability. It is this instability that made the existence of recalcitrant disagreement over putative proofs possible. We do not condemn speculative mathematics but rather its pretense of being rigorous mathematics. In this respect, we show that the overly self-confident Severi and the more intuitive, visionary Enriques had a completely different attitude.

Similar books and articles

Essays on the foundations of mathematics.Moritz Pasch - 2010 - New York: Springer. Edited by Stephen Pollard.
Hobbesian Mathematics and the Dispute with Wallis.Douglas Jesseph - 2021 - In Marcus P. Adams (ed.), A Companion to Hobbes. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley. pp. 57–74.
Mathematical Identity.Donald V. Poochigian - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 41:27-36.
Debates about infinity in mathematics around 1890: The Cantor-Veronese controversy, its origins and its outcome.Detlef Laugwitz - 2002 - NTM Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Wissenschaften, Technik und Medizin 10 (1-3):102-126.
The history of mathematics.Anne Rooney - 2012 - New York: Rosen.
Historical development of Teichmüller theory.Athanase Papadopoulos & Lizhen Ji - 2013 - Archive for History of Exact Sciences 67 (2):119-147.
A Short History of Greek Mathematics.James Gow - 1923 - Cambridge University Press.


Added to PP

146 (#108,190)

6 months
141 (#11,656)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Silvia De Toffoli
University School of Advanced Studies IUSS Pavia

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

Peer disagreement and higher order evidence.Thomas Kelly - 2010 - In Alvin I. Goldman & Dennis Whitcomb (eds.), Social Epistemology: Essential Readings. Oxford University Press. pp. 183--217.
Morality and Mathematics.Justin Clarke-Doane - 2020 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Groundwork for a Fallibilist Account of Mathematics.Silvia De Toffoli - 2021 - Philosophical Quarterly 7 (4):823-844.
Rigor and Structure.John P. Burgess - 2015 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press UK.

View all 25 references / Add more references