Abstract
AbstractMathematics, even more than the other sciences, is often presented as essentially unique, as if it could not be any other way. And yet, prima facie alternative mathematics are all over the place, from non-Western mathematics to mathematics based on nonclassical logics. Taking inspiration from Robin Dembroff’s analysis of critical gender kinds, and from Andrew Aberdein and Stephen Read’s analysis of alternative logics, in this paper I will introduce a practice-centered framework for the study of alternative mathematics based on the notion of critical math kind. After sketching a model of mainstream mathematics, I will provide examples of how deviation along several distinct dimensions can occur, and how deviations can vary in their gravity. I will then discuss how the framework can be used to think of questions concerning the alternativeness status and philosophical implications of alleged alternative mathematics, and help us in identifying alternatives that suit our purposes.
Funder
Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference61 articles.
1. Aberdein, A. (2023). Deep disagreement in mathematics. Global. Philosophy, 33(1), 17.
2. Aberdein, A., & Read, S. (2009). The philosophy of alternative logics. In L. Haaparanta (Ed.), The Development of Modern Logic (pp. 613–723). Oxford University Press.
3. Aczel, P. (1988). Non-well-founded sets. Center for the Study of Language and Information.
4. Ascher, M. (2017). Ethnomathematics: A multicultural view of mathematical ideas. Routledge.
5. Azzouni, J. (2007). How and why mathematics is unique as a social practice. In J. P. Van Bendegem & B. Van Kerkhove (Eds.), Perspectives on mathematical practices (pp. 3–23). Springer.
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