Anti-nominalism reconsidered

Philosophical Quarterly 57 (226):104–111 (2007)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Many philosophers of mathematics are attracted by nominalism – the doctrine that there are no sets, numbers, functions, or other mathematical objects. John Burgess and Gideon Rosen have put forward an intriguing argument against nominalism, based on the thought that philosophy cannot overrule internal mathematical and scientific standards of acceptability. I argue that Burgess and Rosen’s argument fails because it relies on a mistaken view of what the standards of mathematics require.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
First archival date: 2010-12-01
Latest version: 3 (2010-12-01)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Book Reviews. [REVIEW]Burgess, John P.
Book Reviews. [REVIEW]Burgess, John P.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
In Defence of Error Theory.Daly, Chris & Liggins, David
Deferentialism.Daly, Chris & Liggins, David

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
459 ( #6,763 of 43,016 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
23 ( #25,654 of 43,016 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.