Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1603.07209

Leibniz vs Ishiguro: Closing a quarter-century of syncategoremania

Tiziana Bascelli·Piotr Blaszczyk·Vladimir Kanovei·Karin U. Katz·Mikhail G. Katz·David M. Schaps·David Sherry
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Did Leibniz exploit infinitesimals and infinities `a la rigueur, or only as shorthand for quantified propositions that refer to ordinary Archimedean magnitudes? Chapter 5 in (Ishiguro 1990) is a defense of the latter position, which she reformulates in terms of Russellian logical fictions. Ishiguro does not explain how to reconcile this interpretation with Leibniz's repeated assertions that infinitesimals violate the Archimedean property, viz., Euclid's Elements, V.4. We present textual evidence from Leibniz, as well as historical evidence from the early decades of the calculus, to undermine Ishiguro's interpretation. Leibniz frequently writes that his infinitesimals are useful fictions, and we agree; but we shall show that it is best not to understand them as logical fictions; instead, they are better understood as pure fictions. Keywords: Archimedean property; infinitesimal; logical fiction; pure fiction; quantified paraphrase; law of homogeneity

Explore related subjects

math.HO

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Tiziana Bascelli, Piotr Blaszczyk, Vladimir Kanovei, Karin U. Katz, Mikhail G. Katz, David M. Schaps, David Sherry. 2016-03-23. Leibniz vs Ishiguro: Closing a quarter-century of syncategoremania. https://doi.org/10.1086/685645

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Perspectives on the unit distance problem

This is a survey on an old open problem in combinatorics called the unit distance problem, and the field of mathematics around it, called incidence geometry. What do we know about the problem? Why is it difficult? How does it connect with other parts of math?

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

A Categorical Approach to Euclidean Ratios and Proportions

A categorial approach to the non-metric geometry in Books V and VI of Euclid's \textit{Elements} is presented. Specifically, we introduce a diagrammatic syntax that can be overlaid immediately on his diagrams, thus bridging intuitive presentation with fidelity to Euclid's arguments. This syntax makes complicated definitions like V.5, and indeed the arguments throughout books V and VI, including arguments about similar figures, intuitively clear. We show in an appendix that this syntax can be used to solve a puzzle regarding ancient mathematics. Finally, we offer evidence that this approach to Euclidean diagrams is rooted in the Aristotelian tradition itself, and that a similar syntax was utilized, in antiquity, for related questions of numeric and proportions. Thus the syntax is plausibly faithful to Euclid's own thought-world, and not an outside-imposition.

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

Some Early Results by Tutte Regarding the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture in 1948

OpenAI recently announced a proof of the Cycle Double Cover (CDC) Conjecture. Most media reports have characterized it as a 50-year-old open problem. In reality, according to a 1987 letter from Tutte to Fleischner, the Cycle Double Cover Problem has been open for at least 80 years. Two early results regarding the CDC conjecture were established in one of Tutte's 1949 publications.

math.HO↗