Galileo once claimed, "The universe cannot be read until we have learned the language and become familiar with the characters in which it is written. It is written in mathematical language, and the letters are triangles, circles and other geometrical figures, without which means it is humanly impossible to comprehend a single word. Without these, one is wandering about in a dark labyrinth." Galileo's views about the importance of mathematics were/are not unique. Since Ancient Greece, philosophers have argued that mathematics is the paradigm of certain knowledge. Today, almost every science employs mathematics, as mathematical techniques are often thought to embody rigor and objectivity.
In light of these facts, it is perhaps surprising that, until the middle of the 20th century, the foundations of mathematics were hotly contested. Many eminent mathematicians of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (e.g., Hilbert, Cauchy, Weierstraß, Dedekind, etc.) believed that accepted proofs of even elementary theorems from geometry and calculus lacked appropriate logical rigor. This perception led to the "search for rigor" in nineteenth century mathematics and the so-called "crisis" in the foundations of mathematics at the beginning of the twentieth century. This course is an historical introduction to the philosophical questions that prompted this search for rigor and the resulting foundational crisis.
We will focus on one central question: to what degree are mathematical theorems are justified by rational insight, sensory experience, purely symbolic computations, or some combination of the three? We will trace answers to this question from Ancient Greece until Kant's time, and we will pay close attention to how answers to this question are related to mathematical developments concerning the relationship between arithmetic and geometry.
The course presupposes no mathematical background, except familiarity with high-school algebra and geometry.
The course has three central goals. First, by the end of the semester, students should be able to state several key philosophical questions that prompted a search for a "foundation" for mathematics in the 19th and 20th centuries. Second, students should be able to explain how changes in mathematical practice changed philosophical theorizing (and vice versa). In particular, students should be able to identify features of Ancient Greek mathematical practice that led to central epistemological problems in modern philosophy about the justificatory roles of reason, sense perception, and symbolic computation. Finally, students should be able to reconstruct, critique, and develop epistemological arguments about the foundations of mathematics, and they should be able to communicate those arguments orally and in writing that is clear, brief, and precise.
Philosophical thinking is a skill, not unlike playing the piano, riding a bike, or dancing. Learning a new skill requires practice, and the best way to practice philosophical thinking is to write and engage in spirited (but polite) debates with other philosophers. Thus, the central requirement of this course is to write two short papers in which you summarize an argument from the readings and defend it from potential objections. More details about the topics of the three papers can be found on the course website.
Additionally, before each class period, I will ask you to answer two to five short questions about the readings. Most of the questions require only one sentence to answer, and none require more than a paragraph. Please bring both the assigned readings and your answers with you to class. Some students view frequent assignments/assessments as "busy work" or as an instructor's attempt to gauge which students are working hardest. That is is not my intention at all. The philosophy of mathematics is a complex subject, and consequently, many of the assigned readings are somewhat difficult. When faced with hard-to-understand texts, it is easy to become discouraged and to give up. One of my central duties, as an instructor, is to ensure that you do not give up when concepts and/or arguments are initially difficult to understand. The purpose of the nightly questions is threefold: (i) to encourage you to read the assigned texts closely and actively, (ii) to prepare you for class discussions in which we will clarify and build upon the readings, and (iii) to provide me with feedback about which concepts are most difficult for students to understand.
Finally, you will not be able to understand the course material without attending class. I teach some courses (e.g., introductory logic) in which I recognize that, for some very bright, motivated and hard-working students, attending class is not always necessary. This is not such a course. The assigned readings are extremely difficult for a number of reasons, and without class discussion and lecture, you will likely learn very little. To encourage you to attend and to make sure you are active in class discussions, I will ask you a question at the end of every class about the material that has been covered that day, and I will give you fifteen minutes to write a short response to said question.
Reading assignments are due at the beginning of class. You should bring a typed, hard copy of your assignment to class; your answers should not exceed the front side of one page. At the end of class, I will ask you to turn over your reading assignment and respond to a question about the material from class. You can write your response in pencil or pen.
All papers should be submitted electronically via Canvas. Please do not email me your papers unless you already have tried to upload them via Canvas. When a class exceeds even a small number of students (e.g., ten), it is difficult for an instructor to organize and maintain a record of students' work if it is submitted via email.
I use rubrics when assigning you grades on more substantial assignments (e.g., papers and presentations). Rubrics contain detailed descriptions of which skills you are performing well and which are in need of improvement. I encourage you to look at the rubrics before you write your papers so that you know exactly how you will be assessed. Even better, find a partner and grade each other's papers using the provided rubrics. Doing so gives you experience evaluating philosophical work and will improve your own writing.
I do not regrade assignments, but I would be happy to clarify why you received the grade that you did.
Your final grade will be calculated via a weighted average using the following weights:
It is necessary to write all three papers in order to pass the course. Your final grade will be converted to a four point scale using the following equation: Four Point Scale = Percentage/10 - 5.5.
For example, if your final percentage is 90%, then your final grade will be 3.5 = 9/10 - 5.5.
Below is a table indicating readings and assignments that are due each class. If you are a registered student in the class, then you can download the readings from the link in the "Course Files" section above.
| Date | Topic | Readings | Assignment |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1/4 |
Introduction to class themes
Lecture 1 Slides |
Syllabus
Note: There are several sections of the syllabus (e.g., policies concerning late work and computer use) that are available only in the .pdf file. |
None |
| 1/9 | Greek geometry and the role of the diagram
Lecture 2 Slides |
Book 1 of Euclid's Elements: Please read the Common Notions and Postulates (pages 153-155) and
proofs
or propositions 1, 2, 4, 7, 16, and 47.
You may ignore the extensive commentary.
Sections 1 and 2-2.1.2 of Netz's The Shaping of Deduction. |
Reading Assignment 1 |
| 1/11 | Aristotelian Logic
Lecture 3 Slides |
Sections 1-5.5 and 6 of Aristotle's
Logic
Instructor's Notes on Predicate Logic |
Reading Assignment 2 |
| 1/16 | MLK Day. No Class. | None. | None. |
| 1/18 | Locke on Abstract Ideas and Demonstration
Lecture 4 Slides |
Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding.
|
Reading Assignment 3 |
| 1/23 | Criticisms of Abstract Ideas
Lecture 5 Slides Argument Reconstruction Example |
Introduction to Berkeley's A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge. | Reading Assignment 4 |
| 1/25 | Criticisms of Abstract Ideas
Argument reconstruction exercise on Hume |
Section 1.1.7 of Hume's A Treatise of Human Nature
Pages 67-68 of Shapiro's Thinking About Mathematics. (Note: To open the Shapiro book, download a .djvu reader.) |
Reading Assignment 5 |
| 1/30 |
Plato's Theory of Recollection
Lecture Slides |
Meno. Translator's Introduction (pages 870-871) and Lines 79e-86a.
Phaedo Translator's introduction (pages 49-50) and Lines 72e - 77a. |
Reading Assignment 6 |
| 2/1 |
Plato's Philosophy of Mathematics
Lecture Slides Discussion Questions |
Republic. Translator's Introduction (pages 971-972) and Book VII. Lines 514 - 530d. | Reading Assignment 7 |
| 2/6 |
Aristotle's Philosophy of Mathematics
Discussion Questions |
Chapter 3 of Shapiro's Thinking About Mathematics. | Reading Assignment 8 |
| 2/8 |
Eudoxian Theory of Proportion and Greek Number Theory
Lecture Slides |
Euclid's Elements:
|
Reading Assignment 9 |
| 2/13 | Analysis, Arithmetic and Geometry
Lecture Slides |
Bos. Redefining Geometrical Exactness. Sections 1.1 -1.4, 1.6; Chapter 3 pages 37-41; Sections 3.4-3.5, 3.7; Section 5.1, 5.3; Chapter 6. | Reading Assignment 10 |
| 2/15 | Leibniz's Philosophy of Mathematics
Lecture Slides What the Tortoise Said to Achilles |
"Letter to Queen Sophie Charlotte of Prussia" in G.W. Leibniz: Philosophical Essays. Ed. Ariew
and
Garber.
Section 42 "Critical Thoughts on the General Principles of Descartes." In Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: Philosophical papers and letters Read Leibniz's criticisms of Articles 1, 5, 26, 31/35, 43/45/46, and 75. |
Reading Assignment 11 |
| 2/17 |
First Paper Due by 8PM
Assignment Description Suggestions for writing a philosophy paper Rubric |
||
| 2/20 | President's Day. No Class. | None. | None. |
| 2/22 | Leibniz's Logic
Discussion Questions Lecture Slides |
"Preface to a universal characteristic" and "Samples of the Numerical Characteristic." Pages 5-18 of
G.W.
Leibniz: Philosophical Essays. Ed. Ariew and Garber.
"A Study in the Early Logical Calculus." Pages 371-373 of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: Philosophical papers and letters. Ed. Loemker. |
Reading Assignment 12 |
| 2/27 | Kant on geometry
Lecture Slides |
Kant. Excerpts from Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics and Critique of Pure Reason.
|
Reading Assignment 13 |
| 3/1 | The Arithmetization of Analysis |
Berkeley. The Analyst. Articles 1-8 and 13.
Grabiner. The Origins of Cauchy's Rigorous Calculus. Introduction and Chapter 1. |
Reading Assignment 14 |
| 3/6 | Logic and the Search for Foundations | Russell. Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. Chapaters 1 and 2. | Reading Assignment 15 |
| 3/8 | Class Review and Preview |
Review notes and reading assignments from previous classes.
Recommended: Shapiro. Thinking About Mathematics.
|
None. |
| 3/10 | Second Paper Due at Midnight | ||