胡塞尔与数学》,Mirja Hartimo 著(评论)

IF 0.7 1区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Andrea Staiti
{"title":"胡塞尔与数学》,Mirja Hartimo 著(评论)","authors":"Andrea Staiti","doi":"10.1353/hph.2024.a916722","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Husserl and Mathematics</em> by Mirja Hartimo <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Andrea Staiti </li> </ul> Mirja Hartimo. <em>Husserl and Mathematics</em>. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. Pp. 214. Hardback, $99.99. <p>Mirja Hartimo has written the first book-length study of Husserl's evolving views on mathematics that takes his intellectual context into full consideration. Most importantly, Hartimo's historically informed approach to the topic benefits from her extensive knowledge of Husserl's library. Throughout the book, she provides references to texts and articles that Husserl read, marked, and annotated, although regrettably, very few of these sources are quoted explicitly in his published works. The overall picture that emerges from Hartimo's book shows that Husserl continued to read and engage with mathematics throughout his career, and, even though extensive discussions of mathematical issues are not frequent in his later works, some of the ideas he develops, for instance, in <em>The Crisis of the European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology</em>, can be read against the backdrop of the developments of mathematics in his time.</p> <p>Chapter 1 sets the method for the rest of the book. Hartimo emphasizes the importance of a methodological device that takes center stage in Husserl's work from the 1920s onward: <em>Besinnung</em>. Hartimo claims that <em>Besinnung</em> is a method to reactivate the \"goals and purposes\" (21) that originally motivated scientists engaging in a particular line of research. According to Husserl, as specialized research progresses and becomes standard practice, such original goals and purposes might be blurred by other concerns. When applied to mathematics, <em>Besinnung</em> thus amounts to a reflection \"on what mathematicians should do, on what the genuine goal of their activities should be\" (21–22). Hartimo argues that this kind of approach to mathematics comes close to Penelope Maddy's naturalism, which takes its departure from what mathematicians are actually doing and then proceeds to inquire into the ontological status of mathematical objects and theories. Hartimo identifies particularly in David Hilbert, a colleague of Husserl's at Göttingen, a vivid embodiment of what Husserl considered to be exemplary work oriented toward the ideal goal of mathematics.</p> <p>In chapters 2 and 3, Hartimo expands upon Husserl's conception of what the true goal of mathematics should be. She does so, first, by addressing the classical topic of Husserl's psychologism in his first (and only) work entirely devoted to mathematics, <em>The Philosophy of Arithmetic</em>, and Frege's well-known critical review of it. In Hartimo's rendition, Husserl criticizes Frege for his attempt to provide formal definitions of basic notions, such as equality. For Husserl, such basic notions are intuitively available and require no definition—rather, they should be put to work to clarify vague notions. Frege, in return, attacks what he takes to be Husserl's wishy-washy psychological account of numbers, which revolves around the concrete act of collecting items and abstracting from their specific contents. Ultimately, Hartimo argues, Husserl takes Frege's criticism to heart and in his later <em>Prolegomena</em> no longer pursues a psychological foundation of number, but rather emphasizes the distinction between the subjective and the objective sides of mathematics, with philosophers studying the former and mathematicians focusing on the latter. While Hartimo's verdict on the philosophical yield of the debate is in line with the standard interpretation of Frege's review as prompting Husserl's antipsychologistic turn, she makes a remark that might be worthy of further discussion: \"While for Husserl the debate was about logicism, Frege shifts the debate to be about psychologism and here commentators have followed Frege's example\" (50). It would be interesting to imagine what a Fregean reply to Husserl's view about the uselessness of formal definitions for basic notions like equality might look like. In any case, Hartimo's reconstruction makes it clear that, however motivated, Husserl's rejection of psychologism does not amount to an acceptance of logicism.</p> <p>In chapter 3, Hartimo puts forward two of her central claims: (1) Husserl was a structuralist about mathematics; and (2) for Husserl, the goal of modern mathematics is encapsulated in the concept of definiteness. According to (1), mathematics is about the formal structures of systems, which can be isolated and compared. Definiteness, in turn, is the property of systems...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":46448,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Husserl and Mathematics by Mirja Hartimo (review)\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Staiti\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/hph.2024.a916722\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Husserl and Mathematics</em> by Mirja Hartimo <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Andrea Staiti </li> </ul> Mirja Hartimo. <em>Husserl and Mathematics</em>. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. Pp. 214. Hardback, $99.99. <p>Mirja Hartimo has written the first book-length study of Husserl's evolving views on mathematics that takes his intellectual context into full consideration. Most importantly, Hartimo's historically informed approach to the topic benefits from her extensive knowledge of Husserl's library. Throughout the book, she provides references to texts and articles that Husserl read, marked, and annotated, although regrettably, very few of these sources are quoted explicitly in his published works. The overall picture that emerges from Hartimo's book shows that Husserl continued to read and engage with mathematics throughout his career, and, even though extensive discussions of mathematical issues are not frequent in his later works, some of the ideas he develops, for instance, in <em>The Crisis of the European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology</em>, can be read against the backdrop of the developments of mathematics in his time.</p> <p>Chapter 1 sets the method for the rest of the book. Hartimo emphasizes the importance of a methodological device that takes center stage in Husserl's work from the 1920s onward: <em>Besinnung</em>. Hartimo claims that <em>Besinnung</em> is a method to reactivate the \\\"goals and purposes\\\" (21) that originally motivated scientists engaging in a particular line of research. According to Husserl, as specialized research progresses and becomes standard practice, such original goals and purposes might be blurred by other concerns. When applied to mathematics, <em>Besinnung</em> thus amounts to a reflection \\\"on what mathematicians should do, on what the genuine goal of their activities should be\\\" (21–22). Hartimo argues that this kind of approach to mathematics comes close to Penelope Maddy's naturalism, which takes its departure from what mathematicians are actually doing and then proceeds to inquire into the ontological status of mathematical objects and theories. Hartimo identifies particularly in David Hilbert, a colleague of Husserl's at Göttingen, a vivid embodiment of what Husserl considered to be exemplary work oriented toward the ideal goal of mathematics.</p> <p>In chapters 2 and 3, Hartimo expands upon Husserl's conception of what the true goal of mathematics should be. She does so, first, by addressing the classical topic of Husserl's psychologism in his first (and only) work entirely devoted to mathematics, <em>The Philosophy of Arithmetic</em>, and Frege's well-known critical review of it. In Hartimo's rendition, Husserl criticizes Frege for his attempt to provide formal definitions of basic notions, such as equality. For Husserl, such basic notions are intuitively available and require no definition—rather, they should be put to work to clarify vague notions. Frege, in return, attacks what he takes to be Husserl's wishy-washy psychological account of numbers, which revolves around the concrete act of collecting items and abstracting from their specific contents. Ultimately, Hartimo argues, Husserl takes Frege's criticism to heart and in his later <em>Prolegomena</em> no longer pursues a psychological foundation of number, but rather emphasizes the distinction between the subjective and the objective sides of mathematics, with philosophers studying the former and mathematicians focusing on the latter. While Hartimo's verdict on the philosophical yield of the debate is in line with the standard interpretation of Frege's review as prompting Husserl's antipsychologistic turn, she makes a remark that might be worthy of further discussion: \\\"While for Husserl the debate was about logicism, Frege shifts the debate to be about psychologism and here commentators have followed Frege's example\\\" (50). It would be interesting to imagine what a Fregean reply to Husserl's view about the uselessness of formal definitions for basic notions like equality might look like. In any case, Hartimo's reconstruction makes it clear that, however motivated, Husserl's rejection of psychologism does not amount to an acceptance of logicism.</p> <p>In chapter 3, Hartimo puts forward two of her central claims: (1) Husserl was a structuralist about mathematics; and (2) for Husserl, the goal of modern mathematics is encapsulated in the concept of definiteness. According to (1), mathematics is about the formal structures of systems, which can be isolated and compared. Definiteness, in turn, is the property of systems...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46448,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/hph.2024.a916722\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hph.2024.a916722","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要:评论者 胡塞尔与数学》,作者:Mirja Hartimo Andrea Staiti Mirja Hartimo。胡塞尔与数学》。剑桥:剑桥大学出版社,2021 年。第 214 页。精装本,99.99 美元。米里娅-哈蒂莫(Mirja Hartimo)撰写了第一本关于胡塞尔不断演变的数学观点的长篇研究,充分考虑到了胡塞尔的思想背景。最重要的是,哈蒂莫对胡塞尔图书馆的广泛了解,使她对这一主题的研究具有历史依据。在全书中,她提供了胡塞尔阅读、标注和注释过的文本和文章的参考资料,但遗憾的是,这些资料很少在他出版的作品中被明确引用。从哈蒂莫的书中可以看出,胡塞尔在他的整个职业生涯中一直在阅读和接触数学,尽管在他的晚期作品中并不经常对数学问题进行广泛的讨论,但他提出的一些观点,例如在《欧洲科学的危机》和《超验现象学》中提出的观点,可以在他那个时代数学发展的背景下进行解读。第一章为本书的其余部分设定了方法。哈蒂莫强调了一种方法论手段的重要性,这种手段在胡塞尔 20 年代以后的著作中占据了中心位置:Besinnung.哈蒂莫认为,Besinnung 是一种重新激活 "目标和目的"(21)的方法,而这些目标和目的正是科学家从事某一特定研究的最初动机。胡塞尔认为,随着专业研究的进展和标准实践的形成,这些最初的目标和目的可能会被其他关注点所模糊。因此,当应用于数学时,"Besinnung "等同于 "对数学家应该做什么,对他们活动的真正目标应该是什么 "的反思(21-22)。哈蒂莫认为,这种数学研究方法接近佩内洛普-麦迪的自然主义,即从数学家的实际工作出发,进而探究数学对象和理论的本体论地位。哈蒂莫特别从胡塞尔在哥廷根大学的同事大卫-希尔伯特(David Hilbert)身上发现了胡塞尔所认为的面向数学理想目标的模范工作的生动体现。在第 2 章和第 3 章中,哈蒂莫阐述了胡塞尔关于数学真正目标的概念。首先,她探讨了胡塞尔在其第一部(也是唯一一部)专门论述数学的著作《算术哲学》中的心理主义这一经典话题,以及弗雷格对该著作的著名评论。在哈蒂莫的演绎中,胡塞尔批评弗雷格试图为平等等基本概念提供形式化的定义。在胡塞尔看来,这些基本概念凭直觉即可获得,无需定义--相反,它们应该被用来澄清模糊的概念。弗雷格则反过来攻击胡塞尔对数字的肤浅的心理学解释,认为胡塞尔的解释围绕着收集物品的具体行为,并从这些物品的具体内容中抽象出来。哈蒂莫认为,胡塞尔最终接受了弗雷格的批评,在后来的《序言》中不再追求数的心理学基础,而是强调数学的主观和客观的区别,哲学家研究前者,数学家则专注于后者。虽然哈蒂莫对这场争论在哲学上的结果的判断与弗雷格的评论促使胡塞尔反心理学转向的标准解释一致,但她的一句话或许值得进一步讨论:"胡塞尔的争论是关于逻辑主义的,而弗雷格则将争论转向了心理主义,在这方面,评论家们效仿了弗雷格的做法"(50)。弗雷格认为形式定义对于平等这样的基本概念毫无用处,弗雷格对胡塞尔观点的回答可能会是什么样子,我们不妨想象一下。无论如何,哈蒂莫的重构清楚地表明,无论动机如何,胡塞尔对心理主义的拒绝并不等于对逻辑主义的接受。在第 3 章中,哈蒂莫提出了她的两个核心主张:(1) 胡塞尔是一个数学结构主义者;(2) 对胡塞尔而言,现代数学的目标包含在确定性概念中。根据(1),数学是关于系统的形式结构的,这些结构可以被分离和比较。而确定性则是系统的属性......
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Husserl and Mathematics by Mirja Hartimo (review)
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:

  • Husserl and Mathematics by Mirja Hartimo
  • Andrea Staiti
Mirja Hartimo. Husserl and Mathematics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. Pp. 214. Hardback, $99.99.

Mirja Hartimo has written the first book-length study of Husserl's evolving views on mathematics that takes his intellectual context into full consideration. Most importantly, Hartimo's historically informed approach to the topic benefits from her extensive knowledge of Husserl's library. Throughout the book, she provides references to texts and articles that Husserl read, marked, and annotated, although regrettably, very few of these sources are quoted explicitly in his published works. The overall picture that emerges from Hartimo's book shows that Husserl continued to read and engage with mathematics throughout his career, and, even though extensive discussions of mathematical issues are not frequent in his later works, some of the ideas he develops, for instance, in The Crisis of the European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, can be read against the backdrop of the developments of mathematics in his time.

Chapter 1 sets the method for the rest of the book. Hartimo emphasizes the importance of a methodological device that takes center stage in Husserl's work from the 1920s onward: Besinnung. Hartimo claims that Besinnung is a method to reactivate the "goals and purposes" (21) that originally motivated scientists engaging in a particular line of research. According to Husserl, as specialized research progresses and becomes standard practice, such original goals and purposes might be blurred by other concerns. When applied to mathematics, Besinnung thus amounts to a reflection "on what mathematicians should do, on what the genuine goal of their activities should be" (21–22). Hartimo argues that this kind of approach to mathematics comes close to Penelope Maddy's naturalism, which takes its departure from what mathematicians are actually doing and then proceeds to inquire into the ontological status of mathematical objects and theories. Hartimo identifies particularly in David Hilbert, a colleague of Husserl's at Göttingen, a vivid embodiment of what Husserl considered to be exemplary work oriented toward the ideal goal of mathematics.

In chapters 2 and 3, Hartimo expands upon Husserl's conception of what the true goal of mathematics should be. She does so, first, by addressing the classical topic of Husserl's psychologism in his first (and only) work entirely devoted to mathematics, The Philosophy of Arithmetic, and Frege's well-known critical review of it. In Hartimo's rendition, Husserl criticizes Frege for his attempt to provide formal definitions of basic notions, such as equality. For Husserl, such basic notions are intuitively available and require no definition—rather, they should be put to work to clarify vague notions. Frege, in return, attacks what he takes to be Husserl's wishy-washy psychological account of numbers, which revolves around the concrete act of collecting items and abstracting from their specific contents. Ultimately, Hartimo argues, Husserl takes Frege's criticism to heart and in his later Prolegomena no longer pursues a psychological foundation of number, but rather emphasizes the distinction between the subjective and the objective sides of mathematics, with philosophers studying the former and mathematicians focusing on the latter. While Hartimo's verdict on the philosophical yield of the debate is in line with the standard interpretation of Frege's review as prompting Husserl's antipsychologistic turn, she makes a remark that might be worthy of further discussion: "While for Husserl the debate was about logicism, Frege shifts the debate to be about psychologism and here commentators have followed Frege's example" (50). It would be interesting to imagine what a Fregean reply to Husserl's view about the uselessness of formal definitions for basic notions like equality might look like. In any case, Hartimo's reconstruction makes it clear that, however motivated, Husserl's rejection of psychologism does not amount to an acceptance of logicism.

In chapter 3, Hartimo puts forward two of her central claims: (1) Husserl was a structuralist about mathematics; and (2) for Husserl, the goal of modern mathematics is encapsulated in the concept of definiteness. According to (1), mathematics is about the formal structures of systems, which can be isolated and compared. Definiteness, in turn, is the property of systems...

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: Since January 2002, the Journal of the History of Philosophy has been published by The Johns Hopkins University Press. For subscriptions, change of address, and back issues, please contact Subscription Services. In addition to photocopying allowed by the "fair use" doctrine, JHP authorizes personal or educational multiple-copying by instructors for use within a course. This policy does not cover photocopying for commercial use either by individuals or publishers. All such uses must be authorized by JHP.
×
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