Preliminaries
Michael Dummett
Abstract
Michael Dummett
Abstract
Abstract What everyone who has heard of intuitionism knows is that intuitionists want their proofs to be constructive. The notion of a constructive proof is, however, by no means restricted solely to intuitionistic or other forms of ‘constructivist’ mathematics: the distinction between constructive and non-constructive proofs arises within classical mathematics, and is perfectly intelligible from a completely platonistic standpoint.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Abstract What everyone who has heard of intuitionism knows is that intuitionists want their proofs to be constructive. The notion of a constructive proof is, however, by no means restricted solely to intuitionistic or other forms of ‘constructivist’ mathematics: the distinction between constructive and non-constructive proofs arises within classical mathematics, and is perfectly intelligible from a completely platonistic standpoint.
Key concepts: Constructive, Intuitionism, Mathematical proof, Constructive proof, Mathematics, Calculus (dental), Epistemology, Algebra over a field