Abstract
AbstractIn the philosophy of mathematical practice, the aim is to understand the various aspects of this practice. Even though definitions are a central element of mathematical practice, the study of this aspect of mathematical practice is still in its infancy. In particular, there is little empirical evidence to substantiate claims about definitions in practice. In this article, we address this gap by reporting on an empirical investigation on how mathematicians create definitions and which roles and properties they attribute to them. On the basis of interviews with thirteen research mathematicians, we provide a broad range of relevant aspects of definitions. In particular, we address various roles of definitions and show that definitions are not just a product of mathematical factors, but also of social and contingent factors. Furthermore, we provide concrete examples of how mathematicians interact and think about definition. This broad empirical basis with a variety of examples provides an optimal starting point for future investigations into definitions in mathematical practice.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Social Sciences,Philosophy
Reference60 articles.
1. Andersen, L. E. (2020). Acceptable gaps in mathematical proofs. Synthese, 197(1), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-1778-8.
2. Andersen, L. E., Johansen, M. W., & Sørensen, H. K. (2021). Mathematicians writing for mathematicians. Synthese, 198(26), 6233–6250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02145-5.
3. Ashton, Z. (2021). Audience role in mathematical proof development. Synthese, 198(26), 6251–6275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02619-x.
4. Avigad, J. (2020). Modularity in mathematics. The Review of Symbolic Logic, 13(1), 47–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755020317000387
5. Balacheff, N. (1995). Conception, connaissance et concept. In D. Grenier (Ed.), Séminaire Didactique et Technologies cognitives en mathématiques (pp. 219–244). IMAG.