Author:
Dal Magro Tamires,García-Perez Manuel J.
Abstract
We argue against the claim that the employment of diagrams in Euclidean geometry gives rise to gaps in the proofs. First, we argue that it is a mistake to evaluate its merits through the lenses of Hilbert’s formal reconstruction. Second, we elucidate the abilities employed in diagram-based inferences in the Elements and show that diagrams are mathematically reputable tools. Finally, we complement our analysis with a review of recent experimental results purporting to show that, not only is the Euclidean diagram-based practice strictly regimented, it is rooted in cognitive abilities that are universally shared.
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Ancient Greek Mathematical Proofs and Metareasoning;Annals of the Canadian Society for History and Philosophy of Mathematics/ Société canadienne d’histoire et de philosophie des mathématiques;2024
2. Visual Representations of Euclidean Geometry: Diagrammatic Reasoning in Oliver Byrne’s Work;Handbook of the History and Philosophy of Mathematical Practice;2024
3. A hub-and-spoke model of geometric concepts;THEORIA. An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science;2023-03-10
4. Newton's experimental proofs;THEORIA. An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science;2021-01-06
5. Visual Representations of Euclidean Geometry: Diagrammatic Reasoning in Oliver Byrne’s Work;Handbook of the History and Philosophy of Mathematical Practice;2020