structure for 'Mathematics'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

6. Mathematics / C. Sources of Mathematics / 9. Fictional Mathematics

[mathematics is purely invented, and is not true]

11 ideas
Logic and maths refer to fictitious entities which we have created [Nietzsche]
     Full Idea: Logic (like geometry and arithmetic) applies only to fictitious entities that we have created.
     From: Friedrich Nietzsche (The Will to Power (notebooks) [1888], §516)
     A reaction: This finds Nietzsche on the relativist wing of logical empiricism. The thing is, fictitious entities can have a close relationship with truth, as in a great novel. I believe in necessary logical truth, but there are many ways of slicing it.
Numbers are classes of classes, and hence fictions of fictions [Russell]
     Full Idea: Numbers are classes of classes, and classes are logical fictions, so that numbers are, as it were, fictions at two removes, fictions of fictions.
     From: Bertrand Russell (The Philosophy of Logical Atomism [1918], §VIII)
     A reaction: This summarises the findings of Russell and Whitehead's researches into logicism. Gödel may have proved that project impossible, but there is now debate about that. Personally I think of numbers as names of patterns.
Higher cardinalities in sets are just fairy stories [Bostock]
     Full Idea: In its higher reaches, which posit sets of huge cardinalities, set theory is just a fairy story.
     From: David Bostock (Philosophy of Mathematics [2009], 9.5.iii)
     A reaction: You can't say the higher reaches are fairy stories but the lower reaches aren't, if the higher is directly derived from the lower. The empty set and the singleton are fairy stories too. Bostock says the axiom of infinity triggers the fairy stories.
A fairy tale may give predictions, but only a true theory can give explanations [Bostock]
     Full Idea: A common view is that although a fairy tale may provide very useful predictions, it cannot provide explanations for why things happen as they do. In order to do that a theory must also be true (or, at least, an approximation to the truth).
     From: David Bostock (Philosophy of Mathematics [2009], 9.B.5)
     A reaction: Of course, fictionalism offers an explanation of mathematics as a whole, but not of the details (except as the implications of the initial fictional assumptions).
Fictionalists say 2+2=4 is true in the way that 'Oliver Twist lived in London' is true [Field,H]
     Full Idea: The fictionalist can say that the sense in which '2+2=4' is true is pretty much the same as the sense in which 'Oliver Twist lived in London' is true. They are true 'according to a well-known story', or 'according to standard mathematics'.
     From: Hartry Field (Realism, Mathematics and Modality [1989], 1.1.1), quoted by Michčle Friend - Introducing the Philosophy of Mathematics 6.3
     A reaction: The roots of this idea are in Carnap. Fictionalism strikes me as brilliant, but poisonous in large doses. Novels can aspire to artistic truth, or to documentary truth. We invent a fiction, and nudge it slowly towards reality.
Mathematics is only empirical as regards which theory is useful [Field,H]
     Full Idea: Mathematics is in a sense empirical, but only in the rather Pickwickian sense that is an empirical question as to which mathematical theory is useful.
     From: Hartry Field (Science without Numbers [1980], 1)
     A reaction: Field wants mathematics to be fictions, and not to be truths. But can he give an account of 'useful' that does not imply truth? Only in a rather dubiously pragmatist way. A novel is not useful.
Abstractions can form useful counterparts to concrete statements [Field,H]
     Full Idea: Abstract entities are useful because we can use them to formulate abstract counterparts of concrete statements.
     From: Hartry Field (Science without Numbers [1980], 3)
     A reaction: He defends the abstract statements as short cuts. If the concrete statements were 'true', then it seems likely that the abstract counterparts will also be true, which is not what fictionalism claims.
Why regard standard mathematics as truths, rather than as interesting fictions? [Field,H]
     Full Idea: Why regard the axioms of standard mathematics as truths, rather than as fictions that for a variety of reasons mathematicians have become interested in?
     From: Hartry Field (Science without Numbers [1980], p.viii)
Putting numbers in quantifiable position (rather than many quantifiers) makes expression easier [Yablo]
     Full Idea: Saying 'the number of Fs is 5', instead of using five quantifiers, puts the numeral in quantifiable position, which brings expressive advantages. 'There are more sheep in the field than cows' is an infinite disjunction, expressible in finite compass.
     From: Stephen Yablo (Abstract Objects: a Case Study [2002], 08)
     A reaction: See Hofweber with similar thoughts. This idea I take to be a key one in explaining many metaphysical confusions. The human mind just has a strong tendency to objectify properties, relations, qualities, categories etc. - for expression and for reasoning.
Platonic objects are really created as existential metaphors [Yablo]
     Full Idea: The means by which platonic objects are simulated is existential metaphor. Numbers are conjured up as metaphorical measures of cardinality.
     From: Stephen Yablo (Apriority and Existence [2000], §12)
     A reaction: 'Fictional' might be a better word than 'metaphorical', since the latter usually implies some sort of comparison.
Why is fictional arithmetic applicable to the real world? [Potter]
     Full Idea: Fictionalists struggle to explain why arithmetic is applicable to the real world in a way that other stories are not.
     From: Michael Potter (The Rise of Analytic Philosophy 1879-1930 [2020], 21 'Math')
     A reaction: We know why some novels are realistic and others just the opposite. If a novel aimed to 'model' the real world it would be even closer to it. Fictionalists must explain why some fictions are useful.