
Publication details
Year: 2013
Pages: 2065-2083
Series: Synthese
Full citation:
, "Optimus prime", Synthese 190 (12), 2013, pp. 2065-2083.
Abstract
Baker (Mind 114:223–238, 2005; Brit J Philos Sci 60:611–633, 2009) has recently defended what he calls the “enhanced” version of the indispensability argument for mathematical Platonism. In this paper I demonstrate that the nominalist can respond to Baker’s argument. First, I outline Baker’s argument in more detail before providing a nominalistically acceptable paraphrase of prime-number talk. Second, I argue that, for the nominalist, mathematical language is used to express physical facts about the world. In endorsing this line I follow moves made by Saatsi (Brit J Philos Sci 62(1):143–154, 2011). But, unlike Saatsi, I go on to argue that the nominalist requires a paraphrase of prime-number talk, for otherwise we lack an account of what that ‘physical fact’ is in the case of mathematics that seemingly makes reference to prime numbers.
Cited authors
Publication details
Year: 2013
Pages: 2065-2083
Series: Synthese
Full citation:
, "Optimus prime", Synthese 190 (12), 2013, pp. 2065-2083.