Some Coloured Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics in the 20th Century

  • Gerhard Heinzmann
Part of the Logic, Epistemology, And The Unity Of Science book series (LEUS, volume 1)

Abstract

According to the mainstream in the 20th century, the foundations of mathematics were identified with logic and set theory. Indeed, results concerning philosophically most interesting questions are often negative: the first order axiomatic set-theoretical universe is deductively incomplete, inevitably non-standard, and we have no clear idea of what the intended models of set theory are (part I). So, the foundational view of mathematics itself might be suspect. But in the spirit of Poincaré, one should look for an other solution. He remarks that the varieties of classical first order theories is unable to deal with the most common modes of mathematical reasoning such as complete induction and model building. For such a purpose, Hintikka's IF-Logic seems to be an adequate way-out.

Keywords

Elimin 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aspray, W. and P. Kitcher (eds.): 1988, History and Philosophy of Modern Mathematics, Minneapolis, Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  2. Beth, Evert W.: 1965, The Foundations of Mathematics (11959), Amsterdam, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  3. Bryant, Sophie: 1902, ‘The Relation of Mathematics to General Formal Logic’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 2, 105–134, cf. The Journal of Symbolic Logic 1(4), 139.Google Scholar
  4. Cavaillès, Jean: 1938, Remarques sur la formation de la théorie abstraite des ensembles. Etude historique et critique, Paris, Hermann.Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, Paul: 1966, Set Theory and the Continuum Hypothesis, New York, Amsterdam, Benjamin.Google Scholar
  6. Dummett, Michael A. E.: 1973, ‘The Justification of Deduction’, Proceedings of the British Academy 59, 201–232.Google Scholar
  7. Echeverria, Javier et al. (ed.): 1992, The Space of Mathematics. Philosophical Epistemological and Historical Explorations, Berlin, New York, De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  8. Garcia Diego, Alejandro R.: 1992, Bertrand Russell and the Origins of Set-theoretic ‘Paradoxes’, Basel, Boston, Berlin, Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  9. Grattan-Guinness, Ivor: 1996, ‘Normal Mathematics and its Histo(iograph)y: The Tenacity of Algebraic Styles’, in E. Ausejo and M. Hormigon (eds.), Paradigms and Mathematics, Madrid, Siglo XXT de Espana Editores, pp. 203–213.Google Scholar
  10. Heinzmann, Gerhard: 1987, ‘Philosophical Pragmatism in Poincaré’, in J. Srzednicki (ed.), Reason and Argument, Initiatives in Logic, Dordrecht, Boston, Lancaster, Nijhoff, pp. 70–80.Google Scholar
  11. Heinzmann, Gerhard: 2002, ‘Les dogmes rationaliste et empiriste face à leur révision poiétique en philosophie des mathématiques’, in E. Schwartz (ed.), Actes du Colloque Jules Vuillemin, Hildesheim, Olms (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  12. Henkin, Leon: 1967, ‘The Foundations of Mathematics’, in R. Klibansky (ed.), Philosophy in the Mid Century, Firenze, La Nuova Italia Editrice, pp. 116–129.Google Scholar
  13. Hermes, Hans: 1956, ‘über die gegenwärtige Lage der mathematischen Logik und Grundlagen-forschung’, Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker Vereinigung 59, 49–69.Google Scholar
  14. Hintikka, Jaakko: 1996, The Principle of Mathematics Revisited, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Jech, Thomas: 1973, The Axiom of Choice, Amsterdam, London, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  16. Kneebone, G. T.: 1963, Mathematical Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics. An Introductory Survey, London, Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
  17. Livingston, Eric: 1986, The Ethnomethodological Foundations of Mathematics, London, Boston, Henly, Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Mostowski, Andrzej: 1966, Thirty Years of Foundational Studies, Oxford, Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  19. Müller, Gert-Heinz and Lenski, Wolfgang: 1987, Ω-Bibliography of Mathematical Logic, Vols I–VI, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Poincaré, Henri: 1908, Science etméthode, Paris, Flammarion.Google Scholar
  21. Prawitz, Dag: 1974, ‘On the Idea of a General Proof Theory’, Synthese 27, 63–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Quine, Willard Van Orman: 1953, ‘On What There Is’, in Quine (ed.), From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge MA, London, Harvard University Press, pp. 1–19.Google Scholar
  23. Shea, William, R.: 1983, ‘Do Historians and Philosophers of Science Share the Same Heritage?’, in W. Shea (ed.), Nature Mathematized, Dordrecht, London, Reidel.Google Scholar
  24. Vuillemin, Jules: 1979, ‘Laraison au regard de l’instauration et du développement scientifiques', in Th. Geraets (ed.), La rationalité aujourd'hui, Editions de l'Université, Ottawa, pp. 67–84.Google Scholar
  25. Wagner, Roland and Döbler, Jan Berg: 1993, Mathematische Logik von 1847 bis zur Gegenwart, Berlin, New York, De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  26. Wang, Hao: 1964, A Survey of Mathematical Logic, Peking, Amsterdam, Science Press, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  27. Weyl, Hermann: 1985, ‘Axiomatic versus Constructive Procedures in Mathematics’, The Mathematical Intelligenzer 7, 10–17, 38.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerhard Heinzmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, University of Nancy 2Laboratoire de Philosophie et d'Histoire des Sciences – Archives Henri PoincaréFrance

Personalised recommendations