Abstract
Stephen Toulmin once observed that ‘it has never been customary for philosophers to pay much attention to the rhetoric of mathematical debate’ [Toulmin et al., 1979, An Introduction to Reasoning, Macmillan, London, p. 89]. Might the application of Toulmin’s layout of arguments to mathematics remedy this oversight? Toulmin’s critics fault the layout as requiring so much abstraction as to permit incompatible reconstructions. Mathematical proofs may indeed be represented by fundamentally distinct layouts. However, cases of genuine conflict characteristically reflect an underlying disagreement about the nature of the proof in question.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andrew Aberdein (2005) ‘The Informal Logic of Mathematical Proof’ J. P. Bendegem ParticleVan B. Kerkhove ParticleVan (Eds) Perspectives on Mathematical Practices Kluwer Dordrecht
Alcolea Banegas, Jesús: 1998, ‘L’Argumentació en Matemàtiques’, in E. Casaban i Moya (ed.), XIIè Congrés Valencià de Filosofia, Valencià, pp. 135–147 Translation at http://www.fit.edu/\%7Eaberdein/Alcolea.pdf.
Lewis Carroll (1973) Euclid and his Modern Rivals Dover New York, NY
Crowe Michael: 1975, ‘Ten ‘laws’ concerning patterns of change in the history of mathematics’ Historia Mathematica 2, reprinted as (Gillies, 1992, pp. 15–20).
Don Fallis (2003) ArticleTitle‘Intentional Gaps in Mathematical Proofs’ Synthese 134 45–69 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1022131513275
Alexander George Daniel J. Velleman (2002) Philosophies of Mathematics Blackwell Oxford
Donald Gillies (Eds) (1992) Revolutions in Mathematics Clarendon Oxford
Thomas Heath (1956) The Thirteen Books of Euclid’s Elements. Three Volumes. Dover New York, NY
Ian Mueller (1981) Philosophy of Mathematics and Deductive Structure in Euclid’s Elements MIT Press Cambridge, MA
John Pollock (1986) Contemporary Theories of Knowledge Rowman and Littlefield Totowa, NJ
George Pólya (1968) Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, Volume II: Patterns of Plausible Inference Princeton University Press Princeton, NJ
Shapin, Steven: 2002, ‘Dear Prudence’, London Review of Books 24(2), dated 14 January.
Stephen Toulmin (1958) The Uses of Argument Cambridge University Press Cambridge
Stephen Toulmin (1970) ‘Does the distinction between normal and revolutionary science hold water?’ I. Lakatos A. Musgrave (Eds) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge Cambridge University Press Cambridge 39–47
Stephen Toulmin Richard Rieke Allan Janik (1979) An Introduction to Reasoning Macmillan London
Bernard Vitrac (1990) Euclide d’Alexandrie: Les Éléments NumberInSeriesVolume I Presses Universitaires de France Paris
Charles Willard (1976) ArticleTitle‘On the Utility of Descriptive Diagrams for the Analysis and Criticism of Arguments’ Communication Monographs 43 308–319
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Aberdein, A. The Uses of Argument in Mathematics. Argumentation 19, 287–301 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-005-4417-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-005-4417-8