Can the new indispensability argument be saved from Euclidean rescues?

DOI10.1007/s11229-010-9848-6zbMath1275.00019OpenAlexW2033859254MaRDI QIDQ383039

Jacob Busch

Publication date: 25 November 2013

Published in: Synthese (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-010-9848-6

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Philosophy of mathematics (00A30) Philosophical and critical aspects of logic and foundations (03A05)

Related Items (1)

Why inference to the best explanation doesn't secure empirical grounds for mathematical Platonism

Cites Work

• Dispensability in the indispensability argument
• Quine, Putnam, and the `Quine-Putnam' indispensability argument
• Mathematical Explanation in Science
• The Explanatory Power of Phase Spaces
• Mathematics, indispensability and scientific progress
• Unnamed Item
• Unnamed Item
• Unnamed Item
• Unnamed Item
• Unnamed Item
• Unnamed Item
• Unnamed Item
• Unnamed Item

This page was built for publication: Can the new indispensability argument be saved from Euclidean rescues?