Advertisement

Axiomathes

pp 1–8 | Cite as

On Why Mathematics Can Not be Ontology

  • Shiva RahmanEmail author
Original Paper
  • 50 Downloads

Abstract

The formalism of mathematics has always inspired ontological theorization based on it. As is evident from his magnum opus Being and Event, Alain Badiou remains one of the most important contemporary contributors to this enterprise. His famous maxim—“mathematics is ontology” has its basis in the ingenuity that he has shown in capitalizing on Gödel’s and Cohen’s work in the field of set theory. Their work jointly establish the independence of the continuum hypothesis from the standard axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, with Gödel’s result showing their consistency to the affirmative, while Cohen’s showing it to the negative. These results serve as the cornerstone of Badiou’s mathematical ontology. In it, drawing heavily on Cohen’s technically formidable method of forcing, Badiou makes the latter result the key to his defense of the possibility of a faithful tracing of the consequences in the ‘state’ of an ‘event’ by a ‘subject’. Whereas, Gödel’s result based on the assumption of constructability becomes the pivot for criticism of the general philosophical orientation that Badiou calls ‘constructivism’. Viewed from a position internal to mathematical formalism itself, and taking into account the twentieth century developments in the relevant field, Badiou’s stance seems to be neither appreciative of the actual course of such developments, nor just to the philosophical view point that was actually maintained by Gödel. In the present paper, this concern is intended to be substantiated through an exposition of certain facts pertaining to the said developments as well as to Gödel’s philosophical inclinations.

Keywords

Mathematical ontology Continuum hypothesis Constructability Constructivism Demonstrability Metamathematics Objective mathematical truth 

References

  1. Badiou, A. (2006) Being and Event (trans: Feltham O). Continuum, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Feferman S (1988) Kurt Gödel: conviction and caution. In: Shanker S (ed) Godel’s Theorem in focus. Croom Helm, New York, pp 96–114Google Scholar
  3. Gödel K (1995) What is cantor’s continuum problem? In: Feferman S, Dawson JW, Kleene SC, Moore GH, Solvay RM, van Heijenoort J (eds) Kurt Gödel: collected works, vol II. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 1938–1974Google Scholar
  4. Tarski A (1956) The concept of truth in formalised languages. In: Woodger JH (ed) Logic, Semantics and Metamathematics: Papers from 1923 to 1938. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. van Heijenoort J (ed) (1967) From frege to godel, a source book in mathematical logic, 1879–1931. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Wang H (1974) From mathematics to philosophy. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of CalicutCalicutIndia

Personalised recommendations