Abstract
Based on semiotic analyses of examples from the history of mathematics, we claim that the influence of the material aspects of diagram tokens is anything but trivial. We offer an interpretation of examples of diagrammatic reasoning processes in mathematics according to which the mathematical ideas, arguments, and concepts in question are shaped by the physical features of the chosen diagram tokens.
About the authors
Anna Kiel Steensen was born in 1987 in Copenhagen. She holds an MSc in mathematics from University of Copenhagen, 2015, and is a Ph.D. student in the philosophy of mathematics at ETH Zürich as of February, 2017.
Mikkel Willum Johansen was born in 1973 in Copenhagen. He holds a Master’s Degree in philosophy with a minor in mathematics. Beginning with his Ph.D. dissertation in 2011, Naturalism in the Philosophy of Mathematics, he has investigated the philosophy of mathematics, primarily from naturalized and practice oriented perspectives. He is a member of the Association for the Philosophy of Mathematical Practice and is an associate professor in philosophy of science at University of Copenhagen.
References
Barwise, J. & J. Etchemendy. 1996. Heterogeneous logic. In G. Allwein & J. Barwise (eds.), Logical reasoning with diagrams, 179–200. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195104271.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Biggs, N. L., E. K. Lloyd & R. J. Wilson. 1976. Graph theory, 1736–1936. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cardano, G. 1545/2007. The rules of Algebra (Ars Magna). T. R. Witmer, trans. New York: Dover Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Cayley, A. 1857. On the theory of the analytical forms called trees. Philosophical Magazine xiii. 172–176.10.1017/CBO9780511703690.046Search in Google Scholar
De Freitas, E. & N. Sinclair. 2014. Mathematics and the body, material entanglements in the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139600378Search in Google Scholar
Dogan, F. & N. J. Nersessian. 2012. Conceptual diagrams in creative architectural practice: The case of Daniel Libeskind’s Jewish Museum in Berlin. Architectural Research Quarterly 16. 14–28.10.1017/S1359135512000255Search in Google Scholar
Epple, M. 2004. Knot invariants in Vienna and Princeton during the 1920s: Epistemic configurations of mathematical research. Science in Context 17. 131–164.10.1017/S0269889704000079Search in Google Scholar
Gross, J. L., J. Yellen & P. Zhang (eds.). 2014. Handbook of graph theory, 2nd edn. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.10.1201/b16132Search in Google Scholar
Heath, T. L. 1908/2006. The thirteen books of Euclid’s elements. New York: Barnes & Nobel, Inc.Search in Google Scholar
Heath, T. L. 1921. A history of Greek mathematics. Volume 1: From Thales to Euclid. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar
Johansen, M. W. & T. H. Kjeldsen. 2015. Mathematics as a tool driven practice: The use of material and conceptual artefacts in mathematics. In E. Barbin, U. T. Jankvist & T. H. Kjeldsen (eds.), History and epistemology in mathematics education: Proceedings of the Seventh European Summer University, 79–95. Denmark: Aarhus University.Search in Google Scholar
Johansen, M. W. & M. Misfeldt. 2015. Semiotic scaffolding in mathematics. Biosemiotics 8. 325–340.10.1007/s12304-014-9228-6Search in Google Scholar
Katz, V. J. 1998. A history of mathematics: An introduction, 2nd edn. Reading: Addison Wesley Publishing Company.Search in Google Scholar
Kjeldsen, T. H. 2009. Egg-forms and measure-bodies: Different mathematical practices in the early history of the modern theory of convexity. Science in Context 22(1). 85–113.10.1017/S0269889708002081Search in Google Scholar
Latour, B. 1999. Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Mulder, H. M. 1992. Julius Petersen’s theory of regular graphs. Discrete Mathematics 100. 157–175.10.1016/0012-365X(92)90639-WSearch in Google Scholar
Nersessian, N. J. 2012. Modeling practices in conceptual innovation: An ethnographic study of a neural engineering research laboratory. In U. Feest & F. Steinle (eds.), Scientific concepts and investigative practice, 245–269. Berlin: DeGruyter.10.1515/9783110253610.245Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. 1906/1976. Prolegomena for an apology to pragmatism. In C. Eisele (ed.), The new elements of mathematics, volume 4: Mathematical philosophy, 313–330. The Hague: Mouton Publishers.Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. 1960a. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, volume II: Elements of logic, 2nd pr. edn. C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss, eds. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University.Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. 1960b. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, volume IV: The simplest mathematics, 2nd pr. edn. C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss, eds. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University.Search in Google Scholar
Petersen, J. 1891. Die Theorie der regulären graphs. Acta Mathematica 15(1). 193–220.10.1007/BF02392606Search in Google Scholar
Rheinberger, H. J. 1997. Towards a history of epistemic things: Synthesizing proteins in the test tube. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Shin, S. J. 1994. The logical status of diagrams. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511574696Search in Google Scholar
Stjernfelt, F. 2007. Diagrammatology, an investigation on the borderlines of phenomenology, ontology, and semiotics, Synthese Library v. 336. Dordrecht London: Springer.Search in Google Scholar
Stjernfelt, F. 2011. On operational and optimal iconicity in Peirce’s diagrammatology. Semiotica 186. 395–419.10.1515/semi.2011.061Search in Google Scholar
Unguru, S. 1975. On the need to rewrite the history of Greek mathematics. Archive for History of Exact Sciences 15(1). 67–114.10.1007/978-1-4020-2640-9_22Search in Google Scholar
van der Waerden, B. L. 1976. Defence of a “shocking” point of view. Archive for History of Exact Sciences 15(3). 199–210.10.1007/978-1-4020-2640-9_23Search in Google Scholar
©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton
