Hilbert’s Program [electronic resource] : An Essay on Mathematical Instrumentalism / by M. Detlefsen.

За: Інтелектуальна відповідальність: Вид матеріалу: Текст Серія: Synthese Library, Studies in Epistemology, Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science ; 182Публікація: Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands : Imprint: Springer, 1986Видання: 1st ed. 1986Опис: XIV, 186 p. online resourceТип вмісту:
  • text
Тип засобу:
  • computer
Тип носія:
  • online resource
ISBN:
  • 9789401577311
Тематика(и): Додаткові фізичні формати: Printed edition:: Немає назви; Printed edition:: Немає назви; Printed edition:: Немає назвиДесяткова класифікація Дьюї:
  • 160 23
Класифікація Бібліотеки Конгресу:
  • BC1-199
Електронне місцезнаходження та доступ:
Вміст:
I: The Philosophical Fundamentals of Hilbert’s Program -- II: A Closer Look at the Problems -- III: The Gödelian Challenge -- IV: The Stability Problem -- V: The Convergence Problem and the Problem of Strict Instrumentalism -- Appendix: Hilbert’s Program and the First Theorem -- References.
У: Springer Nature eBookЗведення: Hilbert's Program was founded on a concern for the phenomenon of paradox in mathematics. To Hilbert, the paradoxes, which are at once both absurd and irresistible, revealed a deep philosophical truth: namely, that there is a discrepancy between the laws accord­ ing to which the mind of homo mathematicus works, and the laws governing objective mathematical fact. Mathematical epistemology is, therefore, to be seen as a struggle between a mind that naturally works in one way and a reality that works in another. Knowledge occurs when the two cooperate. Conceived in this way, there are two basic alternatives for mathematical epistemology: a skeptical position which maintains either that mind and reality seldom or never come to agreement, or that we have no very reliable way of telling when they do; and a non-skeptical position which holds that there is significant agree­ ment between mind and reality, and that their potential discrepan­ cies can be detected, avoided, and thus kept in check. Of these two, Hilbert clearly embraced the latter, and proposed a program designed to vindicate the epistemological riches represented by our natural, if non-literal, ways of thinking. Brouwer, on the other hand, opted for a position closer (in Hilbert's opinion) to that of the skeptic. Having decided that epistemological purity could come only through sacrifice, he turned his back on his classical heritage to accept a higher calling.
Тип одиниці:
Мітки з цієї бібліотеки: Немає міток з цієї бібліотеки для цієї назви. Ввійдіть, щоб додавати мітки.
Оцінки зірочками
    Середня оцінка: 0.0 (0 голос.)
Немає реальних примірників для цього запису

I: The Philosophical Fundamentals of Hilbert’s Program -- II: A Closer Look at the Problems -- III: The Gödelian Challenge -- IV: The Stability Problem -- V: The Convergence Problem and the Problem of Strict Instrumentalism -- Appendix: Hilbert’s Program and the First Theorem -- References.

Hilbert's Program was founded on a concern for the phenomenon of paradox in mathematics. To Hilbert, the paradoxes, which are at once both absurd and irresistible, revealed a deep philosophical truth: namely, that there is a discrepancy between the laws accord­ ing to which the mind of homo mathematicus works, and the laws governing objective mathematical fact. Mathematical epistemology is, therefore, to be seen as a struggle between a mind that naturally works in one way and a reality that works in another. Knowledge occurs when the two cooperate. Conceived in this way, there are two basic alternatives for mathematical epistemology: a skeptical position which maintains either that mind and reality seldom or never come to agreement, or that we have no very reliable way of telling when they do; and a non-skeptical position which holds that there is significant agree­ ment between mind and reality, and that their potential discrepan­ cies can be detected, avoided, and thus kept in check. Of these two, Hilbert clearly embraced the latter, and proposed a program designed to vindicate the epistemological riches represented by our natural, if non-literal, ways of thinking. Brouwer, on the other hand, opted for a position closer (in Hilbert's opinion) to that of the skeptic. Having decided that epistemological purity could come only through sacrifice, he turned his back on his classical heritage to accept a higher calling.

Немає коментарів для цієї одиниці.

для можливості публікувати коментарі.