scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3521895

From MaRDI portal
Publication:4099559





This is a modified and extended version of the author's essay ``Proofs and Refutations, based on his Ph. D. thesis (Cambridge, 1961), which appeared in the [Br. J. Philos. Sci. 14, No. 53, 1--25 (1963); ibid. 14, No. 54, 120--139 (1963); ibid. 14, No. 55, 221--245 (1963); ibid. 14, No. 56, 296--342 (1963/64)]. The present version was largely prepared by the author, but actual publication was posthumous. The main point that is made is that the traditional `Euclidean' manner of presentation of mathematical theories, and even more so its modern formalist heir, do not communicate the real essence of mathematical thinking. As commonly presented, mathematics is treated as a body of truth, enshrined in theorems proved from axioms; and both the axioms and all the statements that are deduced from them are looked upon as absolutely true. Lakatos maintains that in actual fact mathematical proof is a heuristic process; that what has been proved may well be refuted by discovery of a counterexample; and such discovery does not show the proof to have been bungled, but contributes positively to improvement of the original conjecture. He identifies the following four stages in the process: (1) Primitive conjecture. (2) Proof (a rough thought-experiment or argument, decomposing the primitive conjecture into subconjectures or lemmas). (3) 'Global' counterexamples (counterexamples to the primitive conjecture) emerge. (4) Proof reexamined: the 'guilty lemma' to which the global counterexample is a 'local' counterexample is spotted. This guilty lemma may have previously remained `hidden' or may have been misidentified. Now it is made explicit, and built into the primitive conjecture as a condition. The theorem -- the improved conjecture -- supersedes the primitive conjecture with the new proof-generated concept as its paramount new feature. The methodological theory outlined in these words is substantiated by certain historical case-studies, followed through with meticulous attention to detail. The first and most elaborate of these is of the Cauchy proof of the Descartes-Euler conjecture that, for all polyhedra, \(V - E + F = 2\). The historical sequence is reconstructed in the form of a dialogue between a Teacher and a class of advanced students; and, as each point is made, the relevant historical reference is given in a footnote. This device allows historical facts and philosophical comment to be interwoven as the argument proceeds. A second case-study, presented much more briefly and without recourse to a dialogue, is of the conjecture that the limit of any convergent series of continuous functions is continuous.




Cited in
(only showing first 100 items - show all)








This page was built for publication:

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q4099559)