Standardized PUEBI EYD V’s Regularity in Formal Writing of Mathematical Existential Statement Consequences on Scientific Ontological Theorization to Indonesian Scientific Community
Raisa Rahima
Faculty of Philosophy, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
raisa.rahima@mail.ac.id
Abstract
This paper discusses the consequences of the latest PUEBI EYD
V regulations for scientific ontological theorization through analyzing the
semantical metaphysical commitment it reflects when we write formal mathematical
statements using purely mathematical symbol (e.g., “there are 22 aardvarks”).
This paper shows that PUEBI EYD V commits to mathematical Platonism
metaphysically. This commitment brings harm to observable entities ontological
nature in scientific theorization as shown in nominalism projects of philosophy
of mathematics. Scientific theories - and even mathematical theories - should
always reject the existence of independent objects for there exists only
structures (as truth-value). Authors use nominalism stance as a methodology to
reject the metaphysical commitment of PUEBI and defend the formal usage of
writing mathematical statement without number symbols (“there are twenty-two
aardvarks”, etc.).
Keywords
PUEBI, Philosophy of Mathematics, Scientific Theorization, Mathematical Realism, Nominalism
References
Copi, I. M., Cohen, C., & MacMahon, K.
(2014). Introduction to logic (14 ed., Pearson new international ed).
Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Field,
H. (2016). Science Without Numbers. Great Britain: Oxford University Press.
Frege, G. (1950). Grundlagen Der
Arithmatik. New york: First Harper Torchbooks.
Greimann, D. (2003). What is Frege’s Julius Caesar Problem? Dialectica,
57(3), 261–278.
Langacker, R. (2008). Cognitive Grammar:
A Basic Introduction (1st ed.). Oxford University PressNew York. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
Martin, R. (1963). Intension and
Decision. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall.
raisa.rahima@mail.ac.id
Abstract
This paper discusses the consequences of the latest PUEBI EYD
V regulations for scientific ontological theorization through analyzing the
semantical metaphysical commitment it reflects when we write formal mathematical
statements using purely mathematical symbol (e.g., “there are 22 aardvarks”).
This paper shows that PUEBI EYD V commits to mathematical Platonism
metaphysically. This commitment brings harm to observable entities ontological
nature in scientific theorization as shown in nominalism projects of philosophy
of mathematics. Scientific theories - and even mathematical theories - should
always reject the existence of independent objects for there exists only
structures (as truth-value). Authors use nominalism stance as a methodology to
reject the metaphysical commitment of PUEBI and defend the formal usage of
writing mathematical statement without number symbols (“there are twenty-two
aardvarks”, etc.).
Keywords
PUEBI, Philosophy of Mathematics, Scientific Theorization, Mathematical Realism, NominalismReferences
Copi, I. M., Cohen, C., & MacMahon, K.
(2014). Introduction to logic (14 ed., Pearson new international ed).
Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Field,
H. (2016). Science Without Numbers. Great Britain: Oxford University Press.
Frege, G. (1950). Grundlagen Der
Arithmatik. New york: First Harper Torchbooks.
Greimann, D. (2003). What is Frege’s Julius Caesar Problem? Dialectica,
57(3), 261–278.
Langacker, R. (2008). Cognitive Grammar:
A Basic Introduction (1st ed.). Oxford University PressNew York. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
Martin, R. (1963). Intension and
Decision. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall.
