Abstract
Mathematical theorems are cultural artifacts and may be interpreted much as works of art, literature, and tool-and-craft are interpreted. The Fundamental Theorem of the Calculus, the Central Limit Theorem of Statistics, and the Statistical Continuum Limit of field theories, all show how the world may be put together through the “arithmetic addition” of suitably prescribed parts (velocities, variances, and renormalizations and scaled blocks, respectively). In the limit — of smoothness, statistical independence, and large N — higher-order parts, such as accelerations, are, for the most, part irrelevant, affirming that, in the end, most of the world's particulars may be averaged over (a very un-Scriptural point of view). (We work out all of this in technical detail, including a nice geometric picture of stochastic integration, and a method of calculating the variance of the sum of dependent random variables using renormalization group ideas.) These fundamental theorems affirm a culture that is additive, ahistorical, Cartesian, and continuist, sharing in what might be called a species of modern culture. We understand mathematical results as useful because, like many other such artifacts, they have been adapted to fit the world, and the world has been adapted to fit their capacities. Such cultural interpretation is in effect motivation for the mathematics, and might well be offered to students as a way of helping them understand what is going on at the blackboard. Philosophy of mathematics might want to pay more attention to the history and detailed technical features of sophisticated mathematics, as a balance to the usual concerns that arise in formalist or even Platonist positions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, P. W.: 1984,Basic Notions of Condensed Matter Physics, Benjamin-Cummings, Menlo Park CA.
Arratia, R. and L. Gordon: 1989, ‘Tutorial on Large Deviations for the Binomial Distribution’,Bulletin of Mathematical Biology 51, 125–31.
Aspray, W. and P. Kitcher (eds.): 1988, ‘History and Philosophy of Modern Mathematics’, inMinnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 11, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Dumont, L.: 1977,From Mandeville to Marx, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Hacking, I.: 1983,Representing and Intervening, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Heidegger, M.: 1971, ‘The Origin of the Work of Art’, inPoetry Language Thought, edited by A. Hofstadter, Harper and Row, New York.
Hessen, B.: 1936, 1971, ‘The Social and Economic Roots of Newton's ‘Principia’’, inScience at the Cross Roads, Cass, London.
Huang, K.: 1966,Statistical Mechanics, Wiley, New York.
Kadanoff, L.: 1966,Annals of Physics 2, 263.
Krieger, M. H.: 1987a, ‘Essay Review of E. LivingstonThe Ethnomethodological Foundations of Mathematics’,Advances in Mathematics 64, 326–32.
Krieger, M. H.: 1987b, ‘The Physicist's Toolkit’,American Journal of Physics 55, 1033–38.
Krieger, M. H.: 1989,Marginalism and Discontinuity: Tools for the Crafts of Knowledge and Decision, Russell Sage Foundation, New York.
Krieger, M. H.: 1991,Doing Physics: How Physicists Take Hold of the World, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
Levins, R. and R. Lewontin: 1985,The Dialectical Biologist, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
Lovejoy, A. O.: 1936,The Great Chain of Being, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
MacLane, S.: 1986,Mathematics Form and Function, Springer, New York.
Malkiel, B.: 1989, ‘Is the Stock Market Efficient?’,Science 243, 1313–18.
McKean, H. P.: 1969,Stochastic Integrals, Academic Press, New York.
Meyerson, E.: 1908, 1930, 1962,Identity and Reality, Dover, New York.
Polya, G.: 1920, ‘Uber den zentralen Grenzwertsatz de Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung und das Momentenproblem’,Mathematische Zeitschrift 8, 171–81.
Porter, T.: 1986,The Rise of Statistical Thinking, 1820–1900, Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ.
Rota, G. C.: 1991, ‘The Nature of Mathematical Truth’,Review of Metaphysics XLIV (3).
Rota, G. C.: 1991a, ‘The Pernicious Influence of Mathematics Upon Philosophy’,Synthese 88(2).
Steiner, M.: 1989, ‘The Applicability of Mathematics to Natural Science’,Journal of Philosophy 86, 449–80.
Stigler, S.: 1986,History of Statistics, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
Tymoczko, T.: 1986,New Directions in the Philosophy of Mathematics, Birkhäuser, Boston.
Weinberg, S.: 1983, ‘Why the Renormalization Group is a Good Thing’, in A. H. Guth, K. Huang and R. Jaffe (eds.),Asymptotic Realms of Physics, MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Wigner, E.: 1970, ‘The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences’, inSymmetries and Reflections, MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Wilson, K. G.: 1975, ‘The Renormalization Group: Critical Phenomena and the Kondo Problem’,Reviews of Modern Physics 47, 773–840.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Krieger, M.H. Theorems as meaningful cultural artifacts: Making the world additive. Synthese 88, 135–154 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00567742
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00567742