Philosophers of mathematics commonly distinguish between explanatory and non-explanatory proofs. An important subclass of mathematical proofs are proofs by induction. Are they explanatory? This paper addresses the question, based on general principles about explanation. First, a recent argument for a negative answer is discussed and rebutted. Second, a case is made for a qualified positive take on the issue.
KeywordsMathematical induction Mathematical explanation Logic of explanation Grounding
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bolzano B. (1837) Wissenschaftslehre (4 vls.). Seidel, SulzbachGoogle Scholar
- Bolzano, B. (2004). On the mathematical method and correspondence with Exner (P. Rusnock & R. George, Trans.). Amsterdam, New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
- Correia F. (2010) Grounding and truth-functions. Logique et Analyse 53: 251–279Google Scholar
- Fine K. (2001) The question of realism. Philosopher’s Imprint 1: 1–30Google Scholar
- Fine, K. (forthcoming). Guide to ground. F. Correia & B. Schnieder (Eds.), Grounding, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Lewis D. (1986) Causal explanation. In his Philosophical Papers II. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 214–240Google Scholar
- Mancosu P. (2000) On mathematical explanation. In: Grosholz E., Breger H. (eds) The growth of mathematical knowledge. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 103–119Google Scholar
- Schaffer, J. (unpublished). There’s no fact like totality.Google Scholar