## Dictionary of Arguments | |||

| |||

Mathematical Entities: mathematical entities are research objects of mathematics, which cannot be regarded as material objects. Nevertheless, there are discussions about the status of their existence. Whereas Platonism assumes its (permanent) existence as intellectual objects or universals, this permanence is denied, e.g. by intuitionism, which assumes that mathematical entities exist only at the moment of their construction._____________ Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||

Author | Item | Summary | Meta data |
---|---|---|---|

Big I J. Bigelow, R. Pargetter Science and Necessity Cambridge 1990 Big I 380 Numbers/Armstrong/Bigelow/Pargetter: Armstrong Thesis: Numbers are causally inactive. (Field ditto). Mathematics/Realism/Bigelow/Pargetter: some mathematical entities are even observable! I 381 Causation/Mathematics/BigelowVsArmstrong/Bigelow/Pargetter: Numbers: even they are involved in the causal processes. If objects did not instantiate the quantities they instantiate, other changes would have occurred. Thus at least proportions are causally involved. (s) FieldVsNumbers as causal agents, but not FieldVsProportions). I 382 Counterfactual Dependence/Bigelow/Pargetter: thus we can again set up sequences of counterfactual conditionals, e.g. for the lever laws of Archimedes. This also provides why explanations. I 383 Numbers/Causality/Bigelow/Pargetter: this shows that numbers play a fundamental role in causal explanations. BigelowVsField: (a propos Field, Science without numbers): he falsely assumes that physics first starts with pure empiricism to then convert the results into completely abstract mathematics. Field/Bigelow/Pargetter: wants to avoid this detour. BigelowVsField: his project is superfluous if we realize that mathematics are only a different description of the physical proportions and relations and no detour. _____________ Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Armstrong I David M. Armstrong Meaning and Communication, The Philosophical Review 80, 1971, pp. 427-447 InHandlung, Kommunikation, Bedeutung, Georg Meggle, Frankfurt/M. 1979 Armstrong II (a) David M. Armstrong Dispositions as Categorical States InDispositions, Tim Crane, London New York 1996 Armstrong II (b) David M. Armstrong Place’ s and Armstrong’ s Views Compared and Contrasted InDispositions, Tim Crane, London New York 1996 Armstrong II (c) David M. Armstrong Reply to Martin InDispositions, Tim Crane, London New York 1996 Armstrong II (d) David M. Armstrong Second Reply to Martin London New York 1996 Armstrong III D. Armstrong What is a Law of Nature? Cambridge 1983 |

> Counter arguments against **Armstrong**

Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2019-02-15