Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Arguments based on semantic theses cannot distinguish fic... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Fictionalists must use a non-semantic argument to argue against platonism

    Arguments based on semantic theses cannot distinguish fictionalism from platonism

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Fictionalists and platonists agree on the meaning of 'true'Fictionalists and platonists agree on the meanings of ordinary mathematical utte...Fictionalists can only argue against non-platonistic anti-platonism via semantic...Fictionalists must use a non-semantic argument to argue against platonism

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Similar

    The disagreement between platonism and fictionalism is ontological, no...91%Neither platonists nor fictionalists disagree about any semantic these...83%The platonist/fictionalist semantic theory is better than other semant...81%The positive fictionalist argument requires premise (5), which asserts...81%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: fictionalism-mathematics
    View source passageHide passage
    If the arguments given so far are correct, then the only remaining views—the only philosophies of mathematics that haven’t been ruled out—are platonism and fictionalism. Thus, to complete their argument, fictionalists need merely to provide an argument for premise (5); in other words, they just need to argue against platonism. But this turns out to be a lot harder than arguing against the various non-fictionalistic versions of anti-platonism considered above. As we’ve seen, fictionalists can arg

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective