### Pages

### Posts feed

### Archives

### Recent Comments

- Dennis Ferron on A more natural Disjunction Elimination rule?
- Peter Smith on 4. Tree proofs
- Simon on 4. Tree proofs
- Joseph Tanega on Category theory: introductory readings
- Peter Smith on It’s a small thing to ask …

### Logic/Maths blogs

### Musicians' sites

### Some other blogs

### Last Tweets

- Was fine exhib at Nat Gal of C19 purchases, incl “Botticelli” that’s now OBV not! Bet this’ll be in 2117 exhib of… https://t.co/RAqeFr6Xsx, Nov 16
- RT @JohnRentoul: @georgeeaton Let’s build on it & create an island megalopolis! https://t.co/vc4bjQGR3c, Nov 16
- RT @venezia_56: Dogana da Mar #Benoni Punta della Salute Sull' orizzonte la Giudecca e la Chiesa e Ospizio delle Zitelle… https://t.co/QVvYr6qAOK, Nov 16
- Rather disappointed to see that only one minister had resigned in the time the opera took …, Nov 8
- Aida at Prague National Theatre. Production rather clunky — but Veronika Hajnová a terrific Amneris who made the evening., Nov 8

# Category Archives: Phil. of maths

## Conference: Philosophy of mathematics — truth, existence and explanation.

Philosophy of maths AND Italy — what’s not to like? So let me note that the second conference of the Italian Network for the Philosophy of Mathematics has been announced for 26-28 May 2016, University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy. The invited speakers are Volker … Continue reading

Posted in Italian matters, Phil. of maths
Leave a comment

## Mathematical depth

In our Mind review of Penelope Maddy’s Defending the Axioms, Luca Incurvati and I were rather skeptical about whether she could really rely on the notion of mathematical depth to do as much work as she wants it to do in … Continue reading

Posted in Phil. of maths
2 Comments

## What’s so great about sets?

Here’s something I wrote a while back to answer a question on math.stackexchange about why sets and set theory should (or shouldn’t) be thought to have a special place in maths. Following a link on a related matter I found … Continue reading

Posted in Logic, Phil. of maths
5 Comments

## Quick book note: Pollard’s Mathematical Prelude to the Philosophy of Maths

“This book is based on two premises: one cannot understand philosophy of mathematics without understanding mathematics and one cannot understand mathematics without doing mathematics.” Thus the blurb of Stephen Pollard’s recent book A Mathematical Prelude to the Philosophy of Mathematics … Continue reading

Posted in Books, Logic, Phil. of maths
Leave a comment

## Parsons #4: Gödel

There are four pieces on Kurt Gödel in Parsons’s Philosophy of Mathematics in the Twentieth Century. The first is just ten pages long, and is an encyclopaedia-style entry on Gödel from the 2005 Dictionary of Modern American Philosophers. It seems to me … Continue reading

Posted in Phil. of maths
1 Comment

## Parsons #3: Bernays (continued)

We noted a couple of the most familiar early papers by Bernays, and picked out a prominent theme — a kind of anti-foundationalism (as Parsons labels it). Perhaps we can give finitary arithmetic some distinctive kind of justification (in intuition? in ‘formal … Continue reading

Posted in Phil. of maths
Leave a comment

## Parsons #2: Bernays

I guess for many — most? — of us (the anglophone, non-German-reading us), our initial acquaintance with Paul Bernays as a philosopher of mathematics was via his 1934 lecture ‘On platonism in mathematics’ reprinted in the Benacerraf and Putnam collection Philosophy of Mathematics. In retrospect, the important … Continue reading

Posted in Phil. of maths
Leave a comment

## Parsons #1: Predicativity

As I’ve said before, I’m planning to post over the coming weeks some thoughts on the essays (re)published in Charles Parsons’s Philosophy of Mathematics in the Twentieth Century (Harvard UP). I’m going to be reviewing the collection of Mind, and promising … Continue reading

Posted in Phil. of maths
8 Comments

## Charles Parsons’s new book — let’s discuss it!

Charles Parsons has a new book out, Philosophy of Mathematics in the Twentieth Century a collection of his essays (all but one, I think, previously published but with some new postscripts). Here’s the table of contents. So there is a … Continue reading

Posted in Phil. of maths
5 Comments

## Does mathematics need a philosophy? — 3

Some final thoughts after the TMS meeting last week (again, mostly intended for local mathmos rather than the usual philosophical readers of this blog …). Consider again that rather unclear question ‘Does mathematics need a philosophy?’. Here’s another way of … Continue reading

Posted in Phil. of maths
3 Comments