维特根斯坦论数学

IF 0.4 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Penelope Maddy
{"title":"维特根斯坦论数学","authors":"Penelope Maddy","doi":"10.1111/phin.12441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The mature Wittgenstein's groundbreaking analyses of sense and the logical must—and the powerful new method that made them possible—were the result of a multi‐year process of writing, re‐arranging, re‐writing and one large‐scale revision that eventually produced the <jats:italic>Philosophical Investigations</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>RFM</jats:italic> I. In contrast, his struggles during the same period with questions of arithmetic and higher mathematics remained largely in first‐draft form, and he drops the topic entirely after 1945. In this paper, I argue that Wittgenstein's new method can be applied to the cases of arithmetic and set theory and that the result is innovative, recognizably Wittgensteinian, and independently appealing. I conclude by acknowledging the reasons Wittgenstein himself might have had to resist applying his own proven method to the case of mathematics—particularly to set theory—and by indicating why I think those reasons are ultimately unsound.","PeriodicalId":47112,"journal":{"name":"PHILOSOPHICAL INVESTIGATIONS","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wittgenstein on mathematics\",\"authors\":\"Penelope Maddy\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/phin.12441\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The mature Wittgenstein's groundbreaking analyses of sense and the logical must—and the powerful new method that made them possible—were the result of a multi‐year process of writing, re‐arranging, re‐writing and one large‐scale revision that eventually produced the <jats:italic>Philosophical Investigations</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>RFM</jats:italic> I. In contrast, his struggles during the same period with questions of arithmetic and higher mathematics remained largely in first‐draft form, and he drops the topic entirely after 1945. In this paper, I argue that Wittgenstein's new method can be applied to the cases of arithmetic and set theory and that the result is innovative, recognizably Wittgensteinian, and independently appealing. I conclude by acknowledging the reasons Wittgenstein himself might have had to resist applying his own proven method to the case of mathematics—particularly to set theory—and by indicating why I think those reasons are ultimately unsound.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47112,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PHILOSOPHICAL INVESTIGATIONS\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PHILOSOPHICAL INVESTIGATIONS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/phin.12441\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"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":"PHILOSOPHICAL INVESTIGATIONS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/phin.12441","RegionNum":4,"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

成熟的维特根斯坦对感性和逻辑必然性的开创性分析,以及使这些分析成为可能的强大的新方法,是多年写作、重新整理、重新写作和一次大规模修订的结果,最终产生了《哲学探究》和《RFM I》。相反,他在同一时期对算术和高等数学问题的挣扎基本上还停留在初稿阶段,1945 年后他完全放弃了这一主题。在本文中,我论证了维特根斯坦的新方法可以应用于算术和集合论的情况,其结果具有创新性、维特根斯坦式的可识别性和独立的吸引力。最后,我承认维特根斯坦本人可能有理由抵制将他自己已经证明有效的方法应用于数学--尤其是集合论--并指出为什么我认为这些理由最终是站不住脚的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Wittgenstein on mathematics
The mature Wittgenstein's groundbreaking analyses of sense and the logical must—and the powerful new method that made them possible—were the result of a multi‐year process of writing, re‐arranging, re‐writing and one large‐scale revision that eventually produced the Philosophical Investigations and RFM I. In contrast, his struggles during the same period with questions of arithmetic and higher mathematics remained largely in first‐draft form, and he drops the topic entirely after 1945. In this paper, I argue that Wittgenstein's new method can be applied to the cases of arithmetic and set theory and that the result is innovative, recognizably Wittgensteinian, and independently appealing. I conclude by acknowledging the reasons Wittgenstein himself might have had to resist applying his own proven method to the case of mathematics—particularly to set theory—and by indicating why I think those reasons are ultimately unsound.
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
0.70
自引率
66.70%
发文量
46
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊介绍: Philosophical Investigations features articles in every branch of philosophy. Whether focusing on traditional or on new aspects of the subject, it offers thought-provoking articles and maintains a lively readership with an acclaimed discussion section and wide-ranging book reviews. Special issues are published on topics of current philosophical interest.
×
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