more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 6425

[filed under theme 6. Mathematics / C. Sources of Mathematics / 7. Formalism ]

Full Idea

Formalism is perfectly adequate for doing sums, but not for the application of number, such as the simple statement 'there are three men in this room', so it must be regarded as an unsatisfactory evasion.

Gist of Idea

Formalism can't apply numbers to reality, so it is an evasion

Source

Bertrand Russell (My Philosophical Development [1959], Ch.10)

Book Ref

Russell,Bertrand: 'My Philosophical Development' [Routledge 1993], p.82


A Reaction

This seems to me a powerful and simple objection. The foundation of arithmetic is that there are three men in the room, not that one plus two is three. Three men and three ties make a pattern, which we call 'three'.

Related Idea

Idea 9887 Formalism misunderstands applications, metatheory, and infinity [Frege, by Dummett]


The 24 ideas with the same theme [maths is the consequences of a set of symbols]:

Formalism misunderstands applications, metatheory, and infinity [Frege, by Dummett]
Only applicability raises arithmetic from a game to a science [Frege]
Formalism fails to recognise types of symbols, and also meta-games [Frege, by Brown,JR]
Hilbert said (to block paradoxes) that mathematical existence is entailed by consistency [Hilbert, by Potter]
The subject matter of mathematics is immediate and clear concrete symbols [Hilbert]
The grounding of mathematics is 'in the beginning was the sign' [Hilbert]
Hilbert substituted a syntactic for a semantic account of consistency [Hilbert, by George/Velleman]
Numbers are just verbal conveniences, which can be analysed away [Russell]
Formalists say maths is merely conventional marks on paper, like the arbitrary rules of chess [Russell]
Formalism can't apply numbers to reality, so it is an evasion [Russell]
Formalism is hopeless, because it focuses on propositions and ignores concepts [Ramsey]
Tarski's theory of truth shifted the approach away from syntax, to set theory and semantics [Feferman/Feferman on Tarski]
Formalism says maths is built of meaningless notations; these build into rules which have meaning [Quine]
Formalism is a bulwark of logical positivism [Musgrave]
Formalism seems to exclude all creative, growing mathematics [Musgrave]
Term Formalism says mathematics is just about symbols - but real numbers have no names [Shapiro]
Game Formalism is just a matter of rules, like chess - but then why is it useful in science? [Shapiro]
Deductivism says mathematics is logical consequences of uninterpreted axioms [Shapiro]
For nomalists there are no numbers, only numerals [Brown,JR]
The most brilliant formalist was Hilbert [Brown,JR]
Does some mathematics depend entirely on notation? [Brown,JR]
The formalist defence against Gödel is to reject his metalinguistic concept of truth [Potter]
Game Formalism has no semantics, and Term Formalism reduces the semantics [Linnebo]
Formalism is unconstrained, so cannot indicate importance, or directions for research [Friend]