Skip to main content

Husserl and Hilbert on Completeness

  • Chapter
From Dedekind to Gödel

Part of the book series: Synthese Library ((SYLI,volume 251))

Abstract

In a 1900 paper entitled “On the Number Concept”, the formalist mathematician David Hilbert proposed a set of axioms from which he hoped arithmetic might be derived. The last of these axioms was an “Axiom of Completeness” stipulating that: “It is not possible to adjoin to the system of numbers any collection of things so that in the combined collection the preceding axioms are satisfied; that is, briefly put, the numbers form a system of objects which cannot be enlarged with the preceding axioms continuing to hold.”1

First of all I must thank Mr Dagfinn Føllesdal for his thorough reading of my text and his insightful suggestions as to how to improve it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Hilbert’s “über den Zahlbegriff” was first published in the Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung,vol. 8, 1900, pp. 180–184, and subsequently as an appendix to post-1903 editions of his Grundlagen der Geometrie. I have cited the translation of Hilbert’s axioms for arithmetic appearing in Morris Kline, Mathematical Thought from Ancient to Modern Times, New York, Oxford University Press, 1972, vol. 3, pp. 990–991.

    Google Scholar 

  2. See Edmund Husserl’s Ideas, General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology,New York: Colliers, 1962, §72 and note; Formal and Transcendental Logic, The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1969, §§28–36; Crisis, The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1954, §9f and note. In these texts Husserl refers back to his discussions in Logical Investigations, New York: Humanities Press,1970, vol. 1 §§69 and 70, and to then unpublished material from his Göttingen period now published in appendices to his Philosophie der Arithmetik, The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1970, Husserliana vol. XII. As usual there are some terminological obstacles that make it hard to see the connection Husserl’s ideas have with the logical tradition most familiar to readers of English. First of all, for complete and completeness Husserl uses the German words “definit” and “definitheit” in the place of Hilbert’s “vollstandig” and “vollstandigkeit”. Since in the passages cited above Husserl maintains that his concept of definitheit is exactly the same as Hilbert’s vollstandigkeit,I have tried to avoid the terminological confusion by translating Husserl’s terms by the more familiar “complete” and “completeness” although Husserl translators have understandably chosen “definite” and “definiteness”. Second, in the above texts Husserl refers to his theory of complete Mannigfaltigkeiten, a term which has been translated by “multiplicity” or “manifold”. For Husserl complete Mannigfaltigkeiten are the objective correlates of complete axiom systems.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Suzanne Bachelard, A Study of Husserl’s Formal and Transcendental Logic, Evanston: Northwestern Press, 1968, pp. 59–61. Jean Cavaillès, Sur la logique et la théorie de science, Paris: Vrin, pp. 70–73. Roger Schmit, Husserls Philosophie der Mathematik, Bonn: Bouvier, 1981, pp. 67–86. Hans Lohmar, Husserls Phänomenologie als Philosophie der Mathematik, Dissertation, Cologne, 1987, pp. 151–162. Guillermo Rosado-Haddock, Edmund Husserls Philosophie der Logik und Mathematik im Lichte der Gegenwärtigen Logik und Grundlagenforschung, Dissertation, Bonn: Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms Universität, 1973. Bernold Picker, Die Bedeutung der Mathematik für die Philosophie Edmund Husserls, Dissertation, Münster, 1955.

    Google Scholar 

  4. See for example the note to Husserl’s Ideas § 72.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Karl Schuhmann, Husserl Chronik, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1977, pp. 6–11. I also discuss Husserl’s background throughout my Word and Object in Husserl, Frege, and Russell: Roots of Twentieth Century Philosophy, Athens: Ohio University Press, 1991 and in an article entitled “Husserl and Frege on Substitutivity”, Mind, Meaning and Mathematics, L. Haaparanta ed., Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1994, pp. 113–140.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Linda Mc Alister, The Philosophy of Franz Brentano, London: Duckworth, pp. 45, 49, 53. Andrew Osborn, The Philosophy of E. Husserl in its Development to his First Conception of Phenomenology in the Logical Investigations, New York: International Press, pp. 12, 17, 18, 21. Michael Dummett, The Interpretation of Frege’s Philosophy, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 72–73, and his Frege, Philosophy of Language, London: Duckworth, 2nd ed., 1981, p. 683. Hill, Word and Object…, pp. 59–67 and Chapter 7.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Adolf Fraenkel, “Georg Cantor”, Jahresbericht der deutschen Mathematiker Vereinigung, 39, pp. 221, 253n., 257. Edmund Husserl, Introduction to the Logical Investigations: A Draft of a Preface to the Logical Investigations (1913),The Hague: M. Nijhoff, p. 37 and notes. Jean Cavaillès, Philosophie Mathématique, Paris: Hermann, 1962, p. 182. Schmit, pp. 40–48, 58–62. Lothar Eley: 1970, “Einleitung des Herausgebers”, in the Husserliana Philosophie der Arithmetik, pp. XXIII—XXV. Georg Cantor Briefe, ed. by Herbert Meschkowski, New York: Springer, pp. 321, 373–374, 379–380, 423–424. Two Cantor letters dating from 1895 are published in Walter Purkert and Hans Ilgauds, Georg Cantor 1845–1918, Basel: Birkhäuser, 1991, pp. 206–207.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kline, vol. 3, pp. 950–956, 960–966. Mc Alister, p. 49; Osborne, p. 18; Husserl, Introduction…, p. 37.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hao Wang, From Mathematics to Philosophy, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1974, pp. 145–152 in reference to Bernard Bolzano’s 1837 Wissenschaftlehre §§148 and 155. Bolzano’s book has been partially translated as Theory of Science by R. George, Oxford: Blackwell, 1972, and B. Terrell, Dordrecht: Reidel, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  10. See Husserl texts cited in note 1.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Alfred North Whitehead, An Introduction to Mathematics, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1958 (1911), pp. 62–64.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Appendix VI to the Husserliana Philosophie der Arithmetik, p. 433 and FTL § 31. ‘3 Husserl, Introduction…, pp. 33–36.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hill, Word and Object…,pp. 80–95.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Good accounts of Husserl’s work during the 1890s are given in the editors’ introductions to the Husserliana editions of Husserl’s Philosophie der Arithmetik,Logische Untersuchungen, and Studien zur Arithmetik und Geometrie.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Edmund Husserl, Philosophie der Arithmetik, Halle: Pfeffer, 1891 p. viii, (note this is not the Husserliana edition cited above for the posthumously published material, but Husserl’s 1891 book). Hill, Word and Object…, pp. 84–86.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Husserl, Philosophie der Arithmetik, pp. 340–429 of the Husserliana edition.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cited in Hill, Word and Object…, p. 85. See also Dallas Willard, Logic and the Objectivity of Knowledge, Athens: Ohio University Press, 1984, pp. 115–116.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Husserl, Philosophie der Arithmetik (1891), pp. 104–105, 132–134. I discuss his arguments in depth in “Husserl and Frege on Substitutivity”.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Husserl, Logical Investigations, note p. 179. Husserl actually retracted pp. 129–132, not pp. 124–132 as a typographical error in the English edition indicates.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Husserl, Philosophie der Arithmetik (1891), pp. 130–131.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gottlob Frege, Philosophical and Mathematical Correspondence, Oxford: Blackwell, 1979, p. 65 in reference to Frege’s article “On Formal Theories of Arithmetic” now published in Frege, Collected Papers on Mathematics,Logic and Philosophy, Oxford: Blackwell, 1984, pp. 112–112.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Frege, Collected…, pp. 118–119. Husserl’s own copy of Frege’s article is now in the Husserl library in Leuven, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Gottlob Frege, Posthumous Writings, Oxford: Blackwell, 1979, p. 122. See also Gottlob Frege, Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege, Oxford: Blackwell, 1980, pp. 22–23,32–33,162–213.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Frege, Translations..., pp. 69–70.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Frege, Posthumous…, P. 123.

    Google Scholar 

  26. David Hilbert, “On the Infinite” in From Frege to Gödel, ed. by Jean van Heijenoort, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1967, p. 379.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ibid., p. 383.

    Google Scholar 

  28. See the introduction to the Husserliana edition of Husserl’s Logical Investigations. 30 See the introduction to Husserliana vol. 21, Studien zur Arithmetik und Geometrie, The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1984, p. XII where a 1901 letter from Husserl’s wife is cited.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Constance Reid, Hilbert, New York: Springer Verlag, 1970, pp. 67–68. Reid’s Hilbert and Courant in Göttingen and New York, New York: Springer Verlag, 1976, provide anecdotal material about Husserl’s time in Göttingen. Schuhmann, Husserl Chronik, p. 10, Husserl’s thesis entitled Beiträge zur Theorie der Variationsrechnung.

    Google Scholar 

  30. As Hilbert makes evident in his, “On the Infinite”, anthologized in Van Heijenoort, pp. 369–392.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Frege, Philosophical and Mathematical Correspondence, pp. 34–51, and Gottlob Freges Briefwechsel mit D. Hilbert,E. Husserl, B. Russell,Hamburg: Meiner, 1980, pp. 3, 47. Also Claire Hill, “Frege’s Letters”, pp. 97–118.

    Google Scholar 

  32. The notes for Husserl’s lecture are published as an appendix to the Husserliana edition of Philosophie der Arithmetik,pp. 430–506. I cite them in the text as GL. Concerning the invitation see Husserl’s wife’s letter cited in note 30.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Edmund Husserl, “Rezension von Palagyi”, Zeitschrift fir Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane 31 (1903), p. 290. Translation by Dallas Willard in The Personalist 53 (Winter 1972), pp. 5–13. I cite the passage in question in Hill, Word and Object..., p. 20.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Husserl, Introduction…, pp. 36–38, 48. FTL pp. 184–185, 225.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Hilbert in Van Heijenoort anthology, p. 392.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ibid., pp. 464–465, and 376.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Frege, Translations…, pp. 22–23, 120–121, 141n., 146n., 159–161, for example.

    Google Scholar 

  38. I discuss this at length in my Word and Object…,especially chapter 4, and in “Husserl and Frege on Substitutivity”.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Van Heijenoort, p. 437.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Husserl, Logical Investigations, pp. 293–294.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hill, C.O. (1995). Husserl and Hilbert on Completeness. In: Hintikka, J. (eds) From Dedekind to Gödel. Synthese Library, vol 251. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8478-4_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8478-4_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4554-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-015-8478-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics