Logical and Semantic Purity

@inproceedings{Arana2008LogicalAS,
  title={Logical and Semantic Purity},
  author={Andrew P. Arana},
  year={2008}
}
Many mathematicians have sought ‘pure’ proofs of theorems. There are different takes on what a ‘pure’ proof is, though, and it’s important to be clear on their differences, because they can easily be conflated. In this paper I want to distinguish between two of them. I want to begin with a classical formulation of purity, due to Hilbert: In modern mathematics one strives to preserve the purity of the method, i.e. to use in the proof of a theorem as far as possible only those auxiliary means… CONTINUE READING

From This Paper

Topics from this paper.
6 Citations
24 References
Similar Papers

References

Publications referenced by this paper.
Showing 1-10 of 24 references

Euclidean geometry problems rephrased in terms of midpoints and point–reflections

  • Victor Pambuccian
  • Elemente der Mathematik,
  • 2005
Highly Influential
3 Excerpts

Reflections on the Purity of Method in Hilbert’s Grundlagen der Geometrie

  • Michael Hallett
  • 2008
1 Excerpt

Weak fragments of Peano arithmetic. In The Notre Dame Lectures, volume 18 of Lecture Notes In Logic, pages 149–185

  • Paola D’Aquino
  • Association for Symbolic Logic, Urbana,
  • 2005
3 Excerpts

Fragments of Euclidean and hyperbolic geometry

  • Victor Pambuccian
  • Scientiae mathematicae Japonicae,
  • 2001
2 Excerpts

Similar Papers

Loading similar papers…