Kantian Journal

2017 Vol. 36. №3

Back to the list Download the article

Kant, Gödel, and the problem of synthetic a priori judgements

DOI
10.5922/0207-6918-2017-3-3
Pages
44-60

Abstract

Debates over Kant’s famous postulate about the existence of synthetic a priori judgements in mathematics, formulated in the Critique of Pure Reason, have been raging for over two centuries. On the one hand, it was fiercely criticised by neo-positivists in the early 20th century. On the other hand, Kant’s ideas on constructive nature of mathematics served as a philosophical framework for LEJ Brouwer’s programme of intuitionism in the foundations of mathematics. Of interest are the ideas of the great logician and mathematician Kurt Gödel about the analytical nature of mathematics, put forward in a number of his works on philosophy of mathematics. Although he never mentions synthetic a priori judgements, the course of his reasoning about analytical judgements is close to that employed by Kant. As early as the mid-20th century, Gödel’s incompleteness theorems and the works of Church and Turing constituted arguments in favour of the existence of synthetic a priori judgements. The American logician Irving Copi was the first to use Gödel’s first incompleteness theory to that end. While his small work went almost unnoticed, such ideas were expressed by at least two other mathematicians. In modern mathematics, particularly, Martin-Löf type theory, the existence of synthetic a priori truths, is considered justified. Although it is based on different grounds than those mentioned above, it is nevertheless compatible with Gödel’s results. Analysing proofs of existence of synthetic a priori judgements helps demonstrate that a solution to this problem is determined by the implicitly or explicitly accepted image of logic, whose key parameter is the object of logic or, in other worlds, the ideas about the nature of the logical and, therefore, the ideas about the boundaries of logic and mathematics.

Reference


1. Bryushinkin V. N., Popova V. S. 2010, Logika v russkom neokantianstve: obraz logiki A. I. Vvedenskogo [Logic in Russian Neokantianism: the image of logic A. I. Vvedensky] In: Griftsova, I. N., Dmitrieva, N. A. (eds.), Neokantianstvo nemeckoe i russkoe: mezhdu teoriej poznaniya i kritikoj kultury [German and Russian Neo-Kantianism: between the theory of knowledge and the criticism of culture]. Moscow, р. 165—178.
2. Biryukov B. V. 2000, Vvedenie. Gottlob Frege: sovremennyj vzglyad [Introduction. Gottlob Frege: modern look] In: Frege G. Logika i logicheskaya semantika [Logic and Logical Semantics]. Moscow, рр. 8—63.
3. Gödel K. 2014a, Rasselovskaya matematicheskaya logika (1942) [Russellian mathematical logic] In: Hintikka Y. A. O Gödele. Kurt Gödel Stat'i [About Gödel. Kurt Gödel Articles]. M.: «Kanon+» ROOI «Reabilitaciya», рр. 125—165.
4. Gödel K. 2014b, Nekotorye osnovnye teoremy v osnovaniyah matematiki i ih sledstviya (1951) [Some basic theorems in the foundations of mathematics and their consequences] In: Hintikka Y. A. O Gödele. Kurt Gödel Stat'i [About Gödel. Kurt Gödel Articles]. M.: «Kanon+» ROOI «Reabilitaciya», рр. 125—165.
5. Gödel K. 2014c, Sovremennoe razvitie osnovanij matematiki v svete filosofii (1961) [Modern development of the foundations of mathematics in the light of philosophy] In: Hintikka Y. A. O Gödele. Kurt Gödel Stat'i [About Gödel. Kurt Gödel Articles]. M.: «Kanon+ » ROOI «Reabilitaciya», рр. 125—165.
6. Grifcova I. N. 1998, Logika kak teoreticheskaya i prakticheskaya disciplina. K voprosu o sootnoshenii formal'noj i neformal'noj logiki [Logic as a theoretical and practical discipline. On the question of the relationship between formal and informal logic]. Moscow.
7. Zeebom T. M. 1992, Logika ponyatij kak predposylka kantovskoj formal'noj i transcendental'noj logiki [The logic of concepts as a prerequisite for Kant's formal and transcendental logic] In: Kantovskij sbornik. Vyp. 17. [Kantovsky sbornik. Issue 17] Kaliningrad.
8. Kant, I. 1964, Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason] in: Kant, I. Sochinenija v shesti tomah [The works in six volumes], vol. 3, Moscow. 
9. Kant, I. 1965, Prolegomeni ko vsjakoj buduschej metafisike, moguschej pojavitsja kak nauka [Prolegomena to any future metaphysics that may appear as a science] in: Kant, I. Sochinenija v shesti tomah [The works in six volumes], vol. 4/1, Moscow. 
10. Karnap R. 1971, Filosofskie osnovaniya fiziki [Philosophical Foundations of Physics]. Moscow, Progress.
11. Karnap R., Hahn H., Neurath O. 2006, Nauchnoe miroponimanie — Venskij kruzhok [Wissenshhaftliche Weltauffassung] in: Zhurnal («Poznanie»). Izbrannoe [Journal “Erkenntnis”. Favorites]. Moscow, рр. 57—74.
12. Quine, W. V. 2010, S tochki zreniya logiki. 9 logiko-filosofskih ocherkov [From A Logical Viewpoint - Logico-Philosophical Essays]. Moscow. 
13. Martin-Löf Per. 2011, Logika segodnya. Analiticheskie i sinteticheskie suzhdeniya v teorii tipov [Logic today. Analytical and synthetic judgments in the theory of types] In: Logiko-filosofskie shtudii [Logical and philosophical studies]. T. 9, (№ 1), St. Petersburg, рр. 5—17.
14. Poincare A. 2007, Matematika i logika [Mathematics and Logic] In: Poincare A., Couturat L. Matematika i logika [Mathematics and Logic]. Moscow, рр. 116—148. 
15. Popova V. S. 2010, Spor o logike v universitetskoj filosofii Sankt-Peterburga nachala XX veka [The debate about logic in the university philosophy of St. Petersburg early XX century]. Kaliningrad.
16. Pushkarsky A. G. 2011, Metodologiya istorii logiki: sinteticheskij podhod [Methodology of the History of Logic: A Synthetic Approach] In: Vestnik Baltijskogo federal'nogo universiteta im. Immanuila Kanta. Vyp 6 [IKBFU's Vestnik, 2011 Issue № 06]. Kalinigrad, рр. 25—34.
17. Pushkarsky A. G. Problema analiticheskih i sinteticheskih suzhdenij v istorii i filosofii logiki [The problem of analytical and synthetic judgments in the history and philosophy of logic] In: Ratio.ru. 2012. № 8. Kalinigrad, рр. 160—185.
18. Chaitin G. J. 1999, The Unknowable. Singapore. 
19. Copi I. 1949, 'Modem Logic and the Synthetic A Priori', in: The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 46, p. 243—245.
20. Castonguay, Ch. 1976, Church's Theorem and the Analytic/Synthetic Distinction in Mathematics, In: Philosophica, vol. 18, no. 2, p. 77—89. 
21. DeLong, H. 1970, A Profile of Mathematical Logic, Addison-Wesley Reading, Mass. 
22. Gödel K. 1995, Is mathematics syntax of language? In: Gödel K. Collected Works, V.3. Feferman, S., Dawson, J., Kleene, S., Moore, G., Solovay, R., and van Heijenoort, J. (eds.). Oxford — New — York: Oxford University Press. pp. 334—362.
23. Goldfarb W. 1995, Godel *1953/9: Introductory note to *1953/9. (1995), In: Gödel K. Collected Works, V.3. Feferman, S., Dawson, J., Kleene, S., Moore, G., Solovay, R., and van Heijenoort, J. (eds.). Oxford — New — York: Oxford University Press, рp. 324—334.
24. Turquette A. R. 1950, Gödel and the Synthetic a priori, in: The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 47, no. 5 (Mar. 2, 1950), p. 125—129.
25. Vasyukov V. L. 2017, On Antilogicism In: Desyatye Smirnovskie chteniya: materialy Mezhdunar. nauch. konf., Moskva, 15—17 iyunya 2017 [The Tenth Smirnov Readings in Logic to be held on 15—17 June 2017]. Moscow, pp. 65—67.
26. Wang Hao. 1987, A Logical Joinery: From Gödel to Philosophy. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
27. Wolenski J. 2004, Analytic vs. Synthetic and A Priori vs. A Posteriori In: Handbook Of Epistemology. Springer, pp. 781—839.
28. Wolniewicz, B.: 1994, On the Synthetic A Priori In: J. Woleilski (ed.), Philosophical Logic in Poland, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 327—335.