Abstract
Traditional geometry concerns itself with planimetric and stereometric considerations, which are at the root of the division between plane and solid geometry. In this note (which is based on Arana and Mancosu. The Review of Symbolic Logic 5(2): 294–353, 2012), our major concern is with methodological issues of purity. In the first part we give a rough sketch of some key episodes in mathematical practice that relate to the interaction between plane and solid geometry. In the second part, we look at a late nineteenth century debate (“fusionism”) in which for the first time methodological and foundational issues related to aspects of the mathematical practice covered in the first part of the paper came to the fore. We conclude this part by remarking that only through an axiomatic and analytical effort could the issues raised by the debate on “fusionism” be made precise. The third part focuses on Hilbert’s axiomatic and foundational analysis of the plane version of Desargues’ theorem on homological triangles and its implications for the relationship between plane and solid geometry. Finally, building on the foundational case study analyzed in the third section, in the fourth and last section, we point the way to the analytic work necessary for exploring various important claims on “purity,” “content,” and other relevant notions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Arana, Andrew, and Paolo Mancosu. 2012. On the relationship between plane and solid geometry. The Review of Symbolic Logic 5(2): 294–353.
Chasles, Michel. 1837. Aperçu Historique sur l’Origine et le Développement des Méthodes en Géométrie. Bruxelles: M. Hayez.
De Paolis, Riccardo. 1884. Elementi di Geometria. Torino: Loescher.
Detlefsen, Michael. 2008. Purity as an ideal of proof. In The philosophy of mathematical practice, ed. Paolo Mancosu, 179–197. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Detlefsen, Michael and Arana, Andrew. 2011. Purity of methods. Philosophers’ Imprint 11(2)
Hallett, Michael, and Ulrich Majer (eds.). 2004. David Hilbert’s Lectures on the Foundations of Geometry, 1891–1902. Berlin: Springer.
Hallett, Michael. 2008. Reflections on the purity of method in Hilbert’s Grundlagen der Geometrie. In The philosophy of mathematical practice, ed. Paolo Mancosu, 198–255. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hilbert, David. 1899. Grundlagen der Geometrie. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.
Hilbert, David. 1971. Foundations of Geometry. La Salle: Open Court. English translation of Hilbert 1899.
Isaacson, Daniel. 1987. Arithmetical truth and hidden higher-order concepts. In Logic Colloquium ’85. Amsterdam: North Holland: 147–169.
Klein, Felix. 1873. Über die sogenannte Nicht-Euklidische Geometrie. Mathematische Annalen 6: 112–145.
Mancosu, Paolo (ed.). 2008. The Philosophy of Mathematical Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mancosu, Paolo and Arana, Andrew. 2012. Geometria Piana e Solida: una nota sulla purezza del metodo [Plane and solid geometry: A note on purity of methods]. Notae Philosophicae Scientiae Formalis 1: 89–102. http://gcfcf.com.br/pt/revistas/vol1-num1-maio-2012/
Pappus. 1876–1878. Collectionis quae supersunt, 3 vols. Berlin: Weidman.
Peano, Giuseppe. 1894. Sui Fondamenti della Geometria. Rivista di Matematica 4: 51–90.
Poncelet, Jean-Victor. 1822. Traité des Propriétés Projectives des Figures. Paris: Bachelier.
Torricelli, Evangelista. 1919–1944. Opere di Evangelista Torricelli. Faenza: Stabilimento Tipografico Montanari.
von Staudt, Karl Georg Christian. 1847. Geometrie der Lage. Nürnberg: F. Korn.
Wiener, Hermann. 1892. Über Grundlagen und Aufbau der Geometrie. Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung 1: 45–48.
Acknowledgements
This note is a translation of a note we first published in Italian (Mancosu and Arana 2012). We would like to thank Abel Lassalle Casanave for having given us the stimulus to write the note in Italian and Marco Panza for useful suggestions and comments. In addition, we would like to thank Gabriele Lolli and Giorgio Venturi for having invited the first author to a meeting at the Scuola Normale Superiore in Pisa (on September 23, 2012) and for having suggested to include a translation of our Italian note into English for publication in this volume.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mancosu, P., Arana, A. (2015). Plane and Solid Geometry: A Note on Purity of Methods. In: Lolli, G., Panza, M., Venturi, G. (eds) From Logic to Practice. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, vol 308. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10434-8_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10434-8_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-10433-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-10434-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)