Advertisement

Axiomathes

pp 1–30 | Cite as

Wigner’s Puzzle on Applicability of Mathematics: On What Table to Assemble It?

  • Cătălin BărboianuEmail author
Original Paper
  • 8 Downloads

Abstract

Attempts at solving what has been labeled as Eugene Wigner’s puzzle of applicability of mathematics are still far from arriving at an acceptable solution. The accounts developed to explain the “miracle” of applied mathematics vary in nature, foundation, and solution, from denying the existence of a genuine problem to designing structural theories based on mathematical formalism. Despite this variation, all investigations treated the problem in a unitary way with respect to the target, pointing to one or two ‘why’ or ‘how’ questions to be answered. In this paper, I argue that two analyses, a semantic analysis ab initio and a metatheoretical analysis starting from the types of unreasonableness involved in this problem, will establish the interdisciplinary character of the problem and reveal many more targets, which may be addressed with different methodologies. In order to address objectively the philosophical problem of applicability of mathematics, a foundational revision of the problem is needed.

Keywords

Applicability of mathematics Unreasonableness Wigner’s puzzle Applied mathematics 

Notes

References

  1. Azzouni J (2004) Deflating existential consequence: a case for nominalism. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azzouni J (2006) Tracking reason: proof, consequence, and truth. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balaguer M (1996) A fictionalist account of the indispensable applications of mathematics. Philos Stud 83(3):291–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bangu S (2012) The applicability of mathematics in science: indispensability and ontology. Palgrave Macmillan, HoundmillsGoogle Scholar
  5. Bangu S (2016) On ‘the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences’. In: Ippoliti E et al (eds) Models and inferences in science. Springer, Cham, pp 11–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Batterman R (2002) Asymptotics and the role of minimal models. Br J Philos Sci 53:21–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Batterman R (2009) Idealization and modeling. Synthese 169(3):427–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boniolo G, Budinich P (2005) The role of mathematics in physical sciences and Dirac’s methodological revolution. In: Boniolo G et al (eds) The role of mathematics in physical sciences: interdisciplinary and philosophical aspects. Springer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bueno O, Colyvan M (2011) An inferential conception of the application of mathematics. Noûs 45(2):345–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bueno O, French S (2012) Can mathematics explain physical phenomena? Br J Philos Sci 63(1):85–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bueno O, French S (2018) Applying mathematics: immersion, inference, interpretation. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cao TY (2003) Can we disolve physical entities into mathematical structures? Synthese 136:57–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Colyvan M (2001) The miracle of applied mathematics. Synthese 127(3):265–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ferreirós J (2017) Wigner’s “unreasonable effectiveness” in context. Math Intell 39(2):64–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Field H (1980) Science without numbers: a defense of nominalism. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  16. French S, Ladyman J (2003) The dissolution of objects: between platonism and phenomenalism. Synthese 136:73–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. French S, Ladyman J (2011) In defence of ontic structural realism. In: Bokulich A, Bokulich P (eds) Scientific structuralism. Springer, New York and London, pp 25–42Google Scholar
  18. Ginammi M (2011) The unreasonable effectiveness. The philosophical problem of the applicability of mathematics. Rivista Italiana di Filosofia Analitica Junior 2(2):26–40Google Scholar
  19. Hamming RW (1980) The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics. Am Math Mon 87(2):81–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hellman G (1989) Mathematics without numbers: towards a modal–structural interpretation. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Hennig C (2010) Mathematical models and reality: a constructivist perspective. Found Sci 15(1):29–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Islami A (2017) A match not made in heaven: on the applicability of mathematics in physics. Synthese 194(12):4839–4861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Islami A, Longo G (2017) Marriages of mathematics and physics: a challenge for biology. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 131:179–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Maudlin T (2016) How mathematics meets the world. In: Agguire A et al (eds) Trick or truth? The mysterious connection between physics and mathematics. Springer, Cham, pp 91–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McDonnell J (2017) The pythagorean world: why mathematics is unreasonably effective in physics. Springer, ChamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Molinini D (2019) The weak objectivity of mathematics and its reasonable effectiveness in science. Axiomathes.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-019-09449-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Morrison M (2015) Reconstructing reality: models, mathematics, and simulations. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mujumdar AG, Singh T (2016) Cognitive science and the connection between physics and mathematics. In: Agguire A, Foster B, Merali Z (eds) Trick or truth? The mysterious connection between physics and mathematics. Springer, Cham, pp 201–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pincock C (2004) A new perspective on the problem of applying mathematics. Philos Math 12(3):135–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pincock C (2015) Abstract explanations in science. Br J Philos Sci 66(4):857–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Räz T, Sauer T (2015) Outline of a dynamical inferential conception of the application of mathematics. Stud Hist Philos Sci Part B Stud Hist Philos Mod Phys 49:57–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sarukkai S (2005) Revisiting the ‘unreasonable effectiveness’ of mathematics. Curr Sci 88(3):415–423Google Scholar
  33. Steiner M (1995) The applicabilities of mathematics. Philos Math 3(3):129–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Steiner M (1998) The semantic applicability of mathematics: Frege’s achievement. In: Steiner M (ed) The applicability of mathematics as a philosophical problem. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp 13–23Google Scholar
  35. Teissier B (2005) Protomathematics, perception and the meaning of mathematical objects. In: Grialou P, Longo G, Okada M (eds) Images and reasoning. Keio University, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  36. Wigner EP (1960) The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences. Commun Pure Appl Math 13(1):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wilson M (2000) The unreasonable uncooperativeness of mathematics in the natural sciences. Monist 83(2):296–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ye F (2009) The applicability of mathematics as a scientific and a logical problem. Philos Math.  https://doi.org/10.1093/philmat/nkp014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of BucharestBucharestRomania

Personalised recommendations