Intuition, iteration, induction

M. Atten
{"title":"Intuition, iteration, induction","authors":"M. Atten","doi":"10.31235/osf.io/d36hp","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Mathematical Thought and Its Objects, Charles Parsons argues that our knowledge of the iterability of functions on the natural numbers and of the validity of complete induction is not intuitive knowledge; Brouwer disagrees on both counts. I will compare Parsons' argument with Brouwer's and defend the latter. I will not argue that Parsons is wrong once his own conception of intuition is granted, as I do not think that that is the case. But I will try to make two points: (1) Using elements from Husserl and from Brouwer, Brouwer's claims can be justified in more detail than he has done; (2) There are certain elements in Parsons' discussion that, when developed further, would lead to Brouwer's notion thus analysed, or at least something relevantly similar to it. (This version contains a postscript of May, 2015.)","PeriodicalId":429168,"journal":{"name":"arXiv: History and Overview","volume":"96 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv: History and Overview","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/d36hp","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In Mathematical Thought and Its Objects, Charles Parsons argues that our knowledge of the iterability of functions on the natural numbers and of the validity of complete induction is not intuitive knowledge; Brouwer disagrees on both counts. I will compare Parsons' argument with Brouwer's and defend the latter. I will not argue that Parsons is wrong once his own conception of intuition is granted, as I do not think that that is the case. But I will try to make two points: (1) Using elements from Husserl and from Brouwer, Brouwer's claims can be justified in more detail than he has done; (2) There are certain elements in Parsons' discussion that, when developed further, would lead to Brouwer's notion thus analysed, or at least something relevantly similar to it. (This version contains a postscript of May, 2015.)
直觉,迭代,归纳法
查尔斯·帕森斯在《数学思想及其对象》一书中指出,我们对自然数上函数的可迭代性和完全归纳法的有效性的认识并不是直观的认识;布劳威尔不同意这两点。我将比较帕森斯和布劳威尔的观点,并为后者辩护。一旦帕森斯自己的直觉概念被认可,我不会争辩他是错的,因为我不认为情况是这样的。但我想提出两点:(1)利用胡塞尔和布劳威尔的观点,布劳威尔的主张可以比他所做的更详细地得到证明;(2)帕森斯的讨论中有一些因素,如果进一步发展,就会导致对布劳威尔的概念进行这样的分析,或者至少是与之相关的东西。(本版本包含2015年5月的附言。)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信