M. Katz, Karl Kuhlemann, David Sherry, Monica Ugaglia
{"title":"当前莱布尼茨奖学金的三个案例研究","authors":"M. Katz, Karl Kuhlemann, David Sherry, Monica Ugaglia","doi":"10.14708/am.v15i1.7087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We examine some recent scholarship on Leibniz’s philosophy of the infinitesimal calculus. We indicate difficulties that arise in articles by Bassler, Knobloch, and Arthur, due to a denial to Leibniz’s infinitesimals of the status of mathematical entities violating Euclid V Definition 4.","PeriodicalId":165989,"journal":{"name":"Antiquitates Mathematicae","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Three case studies in current Leibniz scholarship\",\"authors\":\"M. Katz, Karl Kuhlemann, David Sherry, Monica Ugaglia\",\"doi\":\"10.14708/am.v15i1.7087\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We examine some recent scholarship on Leibniz’s philosophy of the infinitesimal calculus. We indicate difficulties that arise in articles by Bassler, Knobloch, and Arthur, due to a denial to Leibniz’s infinitesimals of the status of mathematical entities violating Euclid V Definition 4.\",\"PeriodicalId\":165989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antiquitates Mathematicae\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antiquitates Mathematicae\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14708/am.v15i1.7087\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antiquitates Mathematicae","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14708/am.v15i1.7087","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
We examine some recent scholarship on Leibniz’s philosophy of the infinitesimal calculus. We indicate difficulties that arise in articles by Bassler, Knobloch, and Arthur, due to a denial to Leibniz’s infinitesimals of the status of mathematical entities violating Euclid V Definition 4.