Abstract
AbstractAnalogy has received attention as a form of inductive reasoning in the empirical sciences. Its role in mathematics has, instead, received less consideration. This paper provides a novel account of how an analogy with a more familiar mathematical domain can contribute to the confirmation of a mathematical conjecture. By reference to case-studies, we propose a distinction between an incremental and a non-incremental form of confirmation by mathematical analogy. We offer an account of the former within the popular framework of Bayesian confirmation theory. As for the non-incremental notion, we defend its role in rationally informing the prior credences of mathematicians in those circumstances in which no new mathematical evidence is introduced. The resulting framework captures many important aspects of the use of analogical inference in the domain of pure mathematics.
Funder
Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca
Politecnico di Milano
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference41 articles.
1. Artin, E. (1924). Quadratische Körper im Gebiete der höheren Kongruenzen. II. Analytischer Teil. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 19(1), 207–246.
2. Baker, A. (2007). Is there a problem of induction for mathematics? In M. Potter (Ed.), Mathematical Knowledge (pp. 57–71). Oxford University Press.
3. Bartha, P. (2009). By parallel reasoning. Oxford University Press.
4. Berger, J. (1985). Statistical decision theory and bayesian analysis. Springer.
5. Cangiotti, N., & Nappo, F. (2023). Reasoning by analogy in mathematical practice. Philosophia Mathematica. https://doi.org/10.1093/philmat/nkad003
Cited by
1 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