When you see the
cover page of this book, I think readers would readily become interested.
Mathematics has gained a lot of misconceptions usually from students who are
having a hard time doing calculations and solving problems.
The book “What is mathematics,
really?” by Reuben Hersh answers the question using philosophies. Platonism,
Formalism and Constructivism are the three mathematical philosophies he
considered mainstream. He explained
these three and rejects the ideas of each and offered another one—Humanism.
Humanism says that the concept of
math should be seen and understood as a human activity and a part of our
culture. Hersh pointed out that “There’s
no need to look for a hidden meaning or definition of mathematics beyond its
social-historic-cultural meaning.” From what I understood in this line,
mathematics is defined by looking at the society and the people using and
applying mathematics. One thing that makes math hard is the thought that there
is something concealed. We tend to think of something very complex when the
answers of mathematical problems were just right in front of our eyes.
From the kinds of existence of
math which are physical and mental, he added a third one—social. I agree with
his point. Humans made math, MATH. Math came from our society and is being
applied to improve our society.
Hersh explained Platonism as the
idea that: “mathematical entities exist
outside space and time, outside thought and matter, in an abstract realm
independent of any consciousness, individual or social.”. Because Hersh
looks at mathematics as a way of life of humans and it exists in the society he
rejected this idea. One of his reasons was Platonism does not speak about to
reality.
In formalism, he described it as
a “meaningless game.” Mathematics was just a gate with a set of rules to be
followed. Hersh rejected this philosophy as well since he believed that rules
are not subjective but are “historically
determined by the workings of society that evolve under pressure of the inner
workings and interactions of social groups, and the physiological and
biological environment of earth.” For him, this does not apply to real life
since people do not just follow rules without questioning and looking for proofs.
The third mainstream mathematical
philosophy was Intuitionism. Intuitionism recognizes the fact that the set of
natural numbers are the basic datum of mathematics. It is in natural numbers
where all mathematical processes are obtained through a process of finite
construction which does not use the law of the excluded middle. Hersh also
rejected this one since he believes that the intuition of natural numbers is
not universal.
I don’t think a can choose one
out of the four mathematical philosophies discussed. From the explanations I
got from the book. Mathematics is a little bit of every philosophy. Not
everything about each philosophy is right but it’s not all wrong either. In
formalism, for example, mathematics was governed by a set of rules. This is
true for mathematics. In solving problems, rules are followed. Intuitionism on
the other hand, can also be used in understanding mathematics since you also
need to view individual perspectives in dealing with mathematics.
For me the book cannot be understood
easily by everyone. You need to learn other bodies of knowledge in order to
cope up with what the author has been saying. The first part of the book
already makes your brain think deeply about the question “Is there a four
cube?” If was not required to read this book, I would definitely close it after
reading the first line.
All in all, Hersh’s book was very
informative since he was able to define and provide thorough explanations on
why other philosophies should not be used in studying mathematics. I think the
thing that was lacking was his humanistic approach. It was also very
interesting since collision of other disciplines was done to come up with a new
idea of understanding math.
True, most of students are allergic with math because of the complex calculations and solving (never-ending) problems.
ReplyDeleteTrue. Not everyone can easily digest the information presented in the book because it is written in a way that a lot of people, including me, find too complex to easily understand. But the book is good for appreciation of different views on Mathematics.
ReplyDeletetruelalu! preface pa lang nosebleed na agad. pero hindi mo pa rin masabi na naanswer yung question na "what is math, really?" kasi parang introduction lang nung mga philosophies of math ang pinakita nya. i dunno pero for me wala siya unifying idea kung ano ba talaga ang math
ReplyDeleteyou've mentioned, "For me the book cannot be understood easily by everyone. You need to learn other bodies of knowledge in order to cope up with what the author has been saying." I certainly agree with that. Each and every idea the author tried to pull out seemed too hard to digest, really.
ReplyDelete