Volume 7 · Number 2 · Pages 116–125
Infinity and the Observer: Radical Constructivism and the Foundations of Mathematics

Peter Cariani

Log in download the full text in PDF

> Citation > Similar > References > Add Comment


Problem: There is currently a great deal of mysticism, uncritical hype, and blind adulation of imaginary mathematical and physical entities in popular culture. We seek to explore what a radical constructivist perspective on mathematical entities might entail, and to draw out the implications of this perspective for how we think about the nature of mathematical entities. Method: Conceptual analysis. Results: If we want to avoid the introduction of entities that are ill-defined and inaccessible to verification, then formal systems need to avoid introduction of potential and actual infinities. If decidability and consistency are desired, keep formal systems finite. Infinity is a useful heuristic concept, but has no place in proof theory. Implications: We attempt to debunk many of the mysticisms and uncritical adulations of Gödelian arguments and to ground mathematical foundations in intersubjectively verifiable operations of limited observers. We hope that these insights will be useful to anyone trying to make sense of claims about the nature of formal systems. If we return to the notion of formal systems as concrete, finite systems, then we can be clear about the nature of computations that can be physically realized. In practical terms, the answer is not to proscribe notions of the infinite, but to recognize that these concepts have a different status with respect to their verifiability. We need to demarcate clearly the realm of free creation and imagination, where platonic entities are useful heuristic devices, and the realm of verification, testing, and proof, where infinities introduce ill-defined entities that create ambiguities and undecidable, ill-posed sets of propositions. Constructivist content: The paper attempts to extend the scope of radical constructivist perspective to mathematical systems, and to discuss the relationships between radical constructivism and other allied, yet distinct perspectives in the debate over the foundations of mathematics, such as psychological constructivism and mathematical constructivism.

Key words: Foundations of mathematics, verificationism, finitism, Platonism, pragmatism, Gödel’s Proof, Halting Problem, undecidability, consistency, computability, actualism


Cariani P. (2012) Infinity and the observer: Radical constructivism and the foundations of mathematics. Constructivist Foundations 7(2): 116–125. http://constructivist.info/7/2/116

Export article citation data: Plain Text · BibTex · EndNote · Reference Manager (RIS)

Similar articles

Glasersfeld E. von (2006) A Constructivist Approach to Experiential Foundations of Mathematical Concepts Revisited
Dellwing M. (2013) Josef Mitterer and the Philosopher’s Stone (Around His Neck)
Van Kerkhove B. & Van Bendegem J. P. (2012) The Many Faces of Mathematical Constructivism
Saalmann G. (2007) Arguments Opposing the Radicalism of Radical Constructivism
Cariani P. (2016) Learning of New Percept-Action Mappings Is a Constructive Process of Goal-Directed Self-Modification


Beckman F. S. (1980) Mathematical foundations of programming. Addison-Wesley, Reading MA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Bridgman P. W. (1936) The nature of physical theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Cariani P. (1989) On the design of devices with emergent semantic functions. Ph.D Thesis, State University of New York at Binghamton, Binghamton NY. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Cariani P. (1992) Emergence and artificial life. In: Langton C. G., Taylor C, Farmer J. D. & Rasmussen S. (eds.) Artificial life II. Addison-Wesley, Redwood City CA: 775–798. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Cariani P. (2010) Onwards and upwards, radical constructivism. A guest commentary. Constructivist Foundations 6(1): 127–132. http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/6/1/127.cariani
Cariani P. (2011) The semiotics of cybernetic percept–action systems. International Journal of Signs and Semiotic Systems 1(1): 1–17. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Cariani P. (2012) Creating new primitives in minds and machines. In: McCormack J. & D’Inverno M. (eds.) Computers and creativity. Springer, New York, in press.. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Davis M. (1958) Computability & unsolvability. McGraw-Hill, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Dawson Jr. J. W. (1988) The reception of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems. In: Shanker S. G. (ed.) Gödel’s Theorem in Focus. Routledge, London: 74–95. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Dehaene S. (2011) The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. Revised and updated edition. Oxford University Press, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Delbrück M. & Stent G. S. (1986) Mind from matter? An essay on evolutionary epistemology. Blackwell, Palo Alto CA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Detlefsen M. (1979) On interpreting Gödel’s second theorem. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8(3): 297–313. Reprinted in: Shanker S. G. (ed.) Gödel’s Theorem in focus. Routledge, London: 131–154. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Franzén T. (2005) Gödel’s theorem: An incomplete guide to its use and abuse. A K Peters, Wellesley MA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Glasersfeld E. von (1991) Radical constructivism in mathematics education. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht. Boston. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Glasersfeld E. von (1996) Farewell to objectivity. Systems Research 13(3): 279–286. Reprinted in: Larochelle M. (ed.) (2007) Key works in radical constructivism. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam: 135–142. http://www.vonglasersfeld.com/187
Glasersfeld E. von (2006) A constructivist approach to experiential foundations of mathematical concepts revisited. Constructivist Foundations 1(2): 61–72. http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/1/2/061.glasersfeld.
Glasersfeld E. von (2007) Aspects of constructivism. Vico, Berkeley, Piaget. In: Glasersfeld E. von, Key works in radical constructivism. Edited by Marie Larochelle. Sense, Rotterdam: 91–99. Originally published in Italian as: Glasersfeld E. von (1992) Aspetti del costruttivismo: Vico, Berkeley, Piaget. In: Ceruti M. (ed.) Evoluzione e conoscenza. Lubrina, Bergamo: 421–432. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Gödel K. (1931) Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme I. Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 38: 173–198. English translation: Gödel K. (1988) On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems, I. In: Shanker S. G. (ed.) Gödel’s theorem in focus. Routledge, London: 17–47. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Goodman N. (1956) A world of individuals. In: Bochenski I., Church A. & Goodman N. (eds.) The problem of universals. A symposium. Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame IN: 15–34. Reprinted in: Benacerraf P. & Putnam H. (eds.) (1964) Philosophy of mathematics: Selected readings. First Edition. Basil Blackwell, Oxford: 197–210. Note that the second, 1983 edition omitted this and many other essays critical of mathematical Platonism that were in the first edition. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Hilbert D. (1983) On the infinite. In: Benacerraf P. & Putnam H. (eds.) Philosophy of mathematics: Selected readings. Second Edition. Basil Blackwell, Oxford: 183–201. Originally published in German as: Hilbert D. (1926) Über das Unendliche. Mathematische Annalen 95: 161–190. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kielkopf C. F. (1970) Strict finitism: An examination of Ludwig Wittgenstein’s remarks on the foundations of mathematics. Mouton, The Hague. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kleene S. C. (1967) Mathematical logic. Wiley, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kline M. (1980) Mathematics, the loss of certainty. Oxford University Press, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Lakoff G. & Núñez R. E. (2000) Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. Basic Books, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Maddy P. (1990) Realism in mathematics. Oxford University Press, Oxford. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Mawby J. (2005) Strict finitism as a foundation for mathematics. Ph,D Thesis, University of Glasgow, Scotland. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
McKeon R. (ed.) (1941) The basic works of Aristotle. Random House, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Moore A. W. (1990) The infinite. The problems of philosophy. Routledge, London. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Murdoch D. (1987) Niels Bohr’s philosophy of physics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Nagel E., Newman J. R. & Gödel K. (1958) Gödel’s proof. New York University Press, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Pattee H. H. & Raczaszec-Leonardi (eds.) (2012) Laws, language, and life. Springer, in press. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Pattee H. H. (1985) Universal principles of measurement and language functions in evolving systems. In: Casti J. L. & Karlqvist A. (eds.) Complexity, language, and life: Mathematical approaches. Springer-Verlag, Berlin: 268–281. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Penrose R. (1989) The emperor’s new mind: Concerning computers, minds, and the laws of physics. Oxford University Press, Oxford. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Pepper S. C. (1942) World hypotheses: A study in evidence. University of California Press, Berkeley. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Piaget J. (1980) The psychogenesis of knowledge and its epistemological significance. In: Piatelli-Palmarini M. (ed.) Language and learning. The debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA: 23–34. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Poincaré H. (1952) Science and method. Dover, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Rodych V. (2011) Wittgenstein’s philosophy of mathematics. In: Zalta E. N. (ed.) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Summer 2011 edition. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2011/entries/wittgenstein-mathematics/
Rosen R. (1987) On the scope of syntactics in mathematics and science: The machine metaphor. In: Casti J. & Karlqvist A. (eds.) Real brains, artificial minds. Elsevier, New York: 1–23. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Rosen R. (1994) Effective processes and natural law. In: Herkin R. (ed.) The universal Turing machine: A half-century survey. Second edition. Springer, Vienna: 487–498. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Rotman B. (1993) Ad infinitum: The ghost in Turing’s machine. Stanford University Press, Stanford CA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Rucker R. (1982) Infinity and the mind: The science and philosophy of the infinite. Birkhäuser, Boston. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Shanker S. G. (1987) Wittgenstein and the turning point in the philosophy of mathematics. State University of New York Press, Albany. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Shanker S. G. (1988) Wittgenstein’s remarks on the significance of Gödel’s theorem. In: Shanker S. G. (ed.) Gödel’s Theorem in focus. Routledge, London: 155–256. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Stolzenberg G. (1984) Can an inquiry into the foundations of mathematics tell us anything interesting about mind? In: Watzlawick P. (ed.) The invented reality: How do we know what we believe we know? Norton, New York: 257–309. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Turing A. M. (1936) On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society (Series 2) 42: 230–265. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
van Fraassen B. C. (1980) The scientific image. Oxford University Press, Oxford. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
von Neumann J. (1964) The formalist foundations of mathematics. In: Benacerraf P. & Putnam H. (eds.) Philosophy of mathematics: Selected readings. First Edition. Basil Blackwell, Oxford: 61–65. Originally published in 1931. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Wiener P. P. (ed.) (1951) Leibniz: Selections. Scribners, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Wittgenstein L. (1978) Remarks on the foundations of mathematics. Revised edition. MIT Press, Cambridge MA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Wright C. (1980) Wittgenstein on the foundations of mathematics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Zach R. (2009) Hilbert’s program. In: Zalta E. N. (ed.) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Spring 2009 edition. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2009/entries/hilbert-program.

Comments: 0

To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.