Abstract:Despite some discomfort with this grandly philosophical topic, I do in fact hope to address a venerable pair of philosophical chestnuts: mathematical truth and existence. My plan is to set out three possible stands on these issues, for an exercise in compare and contrast. A word of warning, though, to philosophical purists (and perhaps of comfort to more mathematical readers): I will explore these philosophical positions with an eye to their interconnections with some concrete issues of set theoretic method. Let me begin with a brief look at what to count as ‘philosophy’. To some extent, this is a matter of usage, and mathematicians sometimes classify as ‘philosophical’ any considerations other than outright proofs. So, for example, discussions of the propriety of particular mathematical methods would fall under this heading: should we prefer analytic or synthetic approaches in geometry? Should elliptic functions be treated in terms of explicit representations (as in Weierstrass) or geometrically (as in Riemann)? Should we allow impredicative definitions? Should we restrict ourselves to a logic without bivalence or the law of the excluded middle? Also included in this category would be the trains of thought that shaped our central concepts: should a function always be defined by a formula? Should a group be required to have an inverse for every element? Should ideal divisors be defined contextually or explicitly, treated computationally or abstractly? In addition, there are more general questions concerning mathematical values, aims and goals: Should we strive for powerful theories or low-risk theories? How much stress should be placed on the fact or promise of physical applications? How important are interconnections between the various branches of mathematics? These philosophical questions of method naturally include several peculiar to set theory: should set theorists focus their efforts on drawing consequences for areas of interest to mathematicians outside mathematical logic? Should exploration of the standard axioms of ZFC be preferred to the exploration and exploitation of new axioms? How should axioms for set theory be chosen? What would a solution to the Continuum Problem look like?

The 2S-2P Lamb Shift in He+

In Accordance with a “More Majestic Order”: The New Math and the Nature of Mathematics at Midcentury

What is good mathematics?

The utterly prosaic connection between physics and mathematics

The Quest for Purity : Another Look at the New Wittgenstein

Mathematics, ethics and purism: an application of MacIntyre’s virtue theory

Grothendieck's use of equality

Mathematics: abstraction and reality. A sketch toward deeper analysis

Qualitative (pure) mathematics as an alternative to measurement

Purity, Algebraic Compactness, Direct Sum Decompositions, and Representation Type

Why mathematics needs engineering

Mathematical Understanding of Nature: Essays on Physical Phenomena and Their Understanding by Mathematicians by V. I. Arnold, translated by Alexei Sossinsky and Olga Sipacheva

On mathematics and knowledge

Mathematical Existence

The nature of properly human mathematics

Mathematics as an Exact and Precise Language of Nature

Meaning in Classical Mathematics: Is it at Odds with Intuitionism?

On the Question Why There Exists Something Rather Than Nothing

Teaching mathematics with a different philosophy. Part 1: Formal mathematics as biased metaphysics

Naive Philosophical Foundations

Is deep learning a useful tool for the pure mathematician?