On three arguments against categorical structuralism

Synthese 170 (1):21 - 31 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Some mathematicians and philosophers contend that set theory plays a foundational role in mathematics. However, the development of category theory during the second half of the twentieth century has encouraged the view that this theory can provide a structuralist alternative to set-theoretical foundations. Against this tendency, criticisms have been made that category theory depends on set-theoretical notions and, because of this, category theory fails to show that set-theoretical foundations are dispensable. The goal of this paper is to show that these criticisms are misguided by arguing that category theory is entirely autonomous from set theory.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,127

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
133 (#142,192)

6 months
5 (#710,311)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Makmiller Pedroso
Towson University

References found in this work

What numbers could not be.Paul Benacerraf - 1965 - Philosophical Review 74 (1):47-73.
Naturalism in mathematics.Penelope Maddy - 1997 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Structure in mathematics and logic: A categorical perspective.S. Awodey - 1996 - Philosophia Mathematica 4 (3):209-237.
Category Theory.S. Awodey - 2007 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 13 (3):371-372.

View all 25 references / Add more references