Advertisement

Synthese

pp 1–15 | Cite as

Induction and explanatory definitions in mathematics

  • Ellen LehetEmail author
Article
  • 50 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper, I argue that there are cases of explanatory induction in mathematics. To do so, I first introduce the notion of explanatory definition in the context of mathematical explanation. A large part of the paper is dedicated to introducing and analyzing this notion of explanatory definition and the role it plays in mathematics. After doing so, I discuss a particular inductive definition in advanced mathematics—\({ CW}\)-complexes—and argue that it is explanatory. With this, we see that there are cases of explanatory induction.

Keywords

Philosophy of mathematics Explanation Mathematical induction Mathematical definition Mathematical practice 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank both Curtis Franks and Tim Bays for their feedback on various drafts of this paper, and also the anonymous reviewers who provided numerous helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

References

  1. Arnauld, A., & Nicole, P. (1683). La Logique ou L’art du Penser. Translated by J. Buroker as Logic, or the Art of Thinking (1996). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, A. (2010). Mathematical induction. Analysis, 70(4), 681–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldwin, J. (2016). Foundations of mathematics: Reliability AND clarity: The explanatory role of mathematical induction. In J. Väänänen, A. Hirvonen, & R. de Queiroz (Eds.), Logic, language, information, and computation: 23rd international workshop, WoLLIC 2016, Puebla, Mexico, August 16–19th, 2016. Proceedings (pp. 68–82). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Baldwin, J. (2017). The explanatory power of a new proof: Henkin’s completeness proof. In M. Piazza & G. Pulcini (Eds.), Truth, existence, and explanation: FilMat 2016 studies in philosophy of mathematics. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. De Toffoli, S., & Giardino, V. (2016). Envisioning transformations—The practice of topology. In B. Larvor (Ed.), Mathematical cultures (pp. 25–50). Zurich: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Giaquinto, M. (2008). Cognition of structure. In P. Mancosu (Ed.), Philosophy of mathematical practice (pp. 43–64). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hafner, J., & Mancosu, P. (2005). The varieties of mathematical explanation. In P. Mancosu, et al. (Eds.), Visualization, explanation and reasoning styles in mathematics (pp. 215–250). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hatcher, A. (2001). Algebraic topology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hoeltje, M., Schiender, B., & Steinberg, A. (2013). Explanation by induction? Synthese, 190(3), 509–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lange, M. (2009). Why proofs by mathematical induction are generally not explanatory. Analysis, 69(2), 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lange, M. (2017). Because without cause. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Tappenden, J. (2008a). Mathematical concepts and definitions. In P. Mancosu (Ed.), Philosophy of mathematical practice (pp. 256–275). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Tappenden, J. (2008b). Mathematical concepts: fruitfulness and naturalness. In P. Mancosu (Ed.), Philosophy of mathematical practice (pp. 276–301). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Thurston, W. (1995). Proof and progress in mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 15(1), 29–37.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Philosophy DepartmentUniversity of Notre DameNotre DameUSA

Personalised recommendations