Dissertation, University of Bristol (2020)

The initial motivating question for this thesis is what the standard of rigour in modern mathematics amounts to: what makes a proof rigorous, or fail to be rigorous? How is this judged? A new account of rigour is put forward, aiming to go some way to answering these questions. Some benefits of the norm of rigour on this account are discussed. The account is contrasted with other remarks that have been made about mathematical proof and its workings, and is tested and illustrated by considering a case study discussed in the literature. On the view put forward here one can obtain a manner of informal, rigorous mathematics founded on any of a variety of proof systems. The latter part of the thesis is concerned with the question of how we should decide which of these competing proof systems we should base our mathematics on: i.e., the question of which proof system we should take as a foundation for our mathematics. A novel answer to this question is proposed, in which the key property we should require of a proof system is that for as many different kinds of structures as possible, when the proof system allows a generalization about that kind of structure to be proved, the generalization actually holds of all real examples of that kind of structure which exist. This is the requirement of soundness of the proof system. It is argued that the best way to establish the soundness of a proof system may be by giving an interpretation of its axioms on which they are established as true. As preparation for this discussion, the thesis first investigates the logical and conceptual basis of various arithmetic concepts, with the results obtained used in the final discussion of soundness.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 62,289
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

The Nature of Mathematical Knowledge.Philip Kitcher - 1983 - Oxford University Press.

View all 55 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Rigour and Intuition.Oliver Tatton-Brown - forthcoming - Erkenntnis:1-25.
Rigour and Intuition.Oliver Tatton-Brown - forthcoming - Erkenntnis:1-25.
Rigour and Intuition.Oliver Tatton-Brown - forthcoming - Erkenntnis:1-25.
Rigour and Proof.Oliver Tatton-Brown - forthcoming - Review of Symbolic Logic:1-29.
An Analysis of the Notion of Rigour in Proofs.Michele Friend & Andrea Pedeferri - 2011 - Logic and Philosophy of Science 9 (1):165-171.
Implicit Proofs.Jan Krajíček - 2004 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 69 (2):387 - 397.
Implicit Proofs.Jan Krajíček - 2004 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 69 (2):387-397.
Proof in Mathematics: An Introduction.James Franklin - 1996 - Sydney, Australia: Quakers Hill Press.
Arguing Around Mathematical Proofs.Michel Dufour - 2013 - In Andrew Aberdein & Ian J. Dove (eds.), The Argument of Mathematics. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 61-76.


Added to PP index

Total views
20 ( #534,390 of 62,299 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
20 ( #37,064 of 62,299 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes