Towards a critical epistemology of mathematics

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34024/prometeica.2023.27.15414

Keywords:

mathematics education, philosophy of mathematics, critical theory, epistemology

Abstract

This essay addresses a critical epistemology of mathematics as an investigation into the epistemic limitations of mathematical thinking. After arguing for the relevance of a critical epistemology of mathematics, I discuss assumptions underlying standard arithmetic and assumptions underlying standard logic as examples for such epistemic limitations of mathematical thinking. Looking into the work of philosophically inte­res­ted scholars in mathematics education such as Alan Bishop and Ole Skovsmose, I discuss some early insights for a critical epistemology of mathematics. I conclude that these insights can only be the beginning, that we are yet far away from a proper under­standing of the epistemic limitations of mathematics, and that more research is needed.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biography

  • David Kollosche, University of Klagenfurt

    University of Klagenfurt, Austria

    Department for Didactics of Mathematics

    Head of Department, Ordinary Professor

References

Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, M. J. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. Basic Books.

Bishop, A. J. (1988). Mathematical enculturation: A cultural perspective on mathematics education. Kluwer.

Bishop, A. J., Tan, H., & Barkatsas, A. N. (Eds.). (2015). Diversity in mathematics education: Towards inclusive practices. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05978-5

Burton, L. (1995). Moving towards a feminist epistemology of mathematics. In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: Influences of feminism and culture (pp. 211–227). Falmer.

Cartwright, N. (1983). How the laws of physics lie. Clarendon.

Chapman, O. (1993). Women’s voice and the learning of mathematics. Journal of Gender Studies, 2(2), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.1993.9960539

Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition. Columbia University Press. (Original work published 1968)

Dörfler, W. (2003). Mathematics and mathematics education: Content and people, relation and difference. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 54(2), 147–170. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDUC.0000006118.25919.07

Galilei, G. (1610). Sidereus Nincius [Message from the stars]. Baglioni.

Gutiérrez, R. (2012). Embracing Nepantla: Rethinking ‘knowledge’ and its use in mathematics teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 1(1), 29–56. https://doi.org/10.4471/redimat.2012.02

Hacking, I. (2014). Why is there philosophy of mathematics at all? Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107279346

Hersh, R. (1979). Some proposals for reviving the philosophy of mathematics. Advances in mathematics, 31, 31–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8708(79)90018-5

Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. W. (1997). Dialectic of enlightenment. Verso. (Original work published 1944)

Husserl, E. (2003). Philosophy of arithmetic: Psychological and logical investigations. Kluwer. (Original work published 1891)

Klein, P. D. (2005). Epistemology. In E. Craig (Ed.), The shorter Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy (pp. 224–227). Routledge.

Kollosche, D. (in press). 2+2=4? Mathematics lost between the pitfalls of essentialism and alternative truths. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education.

Kollosche, D. (2013). Logic, society and school mathematics. In B. Ubuz, Ç. Haser, & M. A. Mariotti (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1754–1763). Middle East Technical University.

Kollosche, D. (2018). The true purpose of mathematics education: A provocation. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 15(1-2), 303–319. https://doi.org/10.54870/1551-3440.1428

Kollosche, D. (2019). Reasons for auto-exclusion: Why students reject mathematics. In D. Kollosche, R. Marcone, M. Knigge, M. G. Penteado, & O. Skovsmose (Eds.), Inclusive mathematics education: State-of-the-art research from Brazil and Germany (449-465). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11518-0_26

Kollosche, D. (2021). Styles of reasoning for mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107, 471–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10046-z

Lindley, D. (2020). The dream universe: How fundamental physics lost its way. Doubleday.

Maddy, P. (2008). How applied mathematics became pure. The Review of Symbolic Logic, 1(1), 16–41. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755020308080027

Mendick, H. (2006). Masculinities in mathematics. Open University.

O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Broadway Books.

Porter, T. M. (1996). Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton University Press.

Schneider, M. (2020). Epistemological obstacles in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 276–279). Springer.

Skovsmose, O. (1985). Mathematical education versus Critical Education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 16, 337–354.

Skovsmose, O. (1994). Towards a philosophy of critical mathematics education. Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3556-8

Skovsmose, O. (2005). Travelling through education: Uncertainty, mathematics, responsibility. Sense. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087903626

Skovsmose, O. (2009). In doubt – about language, mathematics, knowledge and life-worlds. Sense. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789460910289

Skovsmose, O. (2021). Mathematics and crises. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108(1-2), 369–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10037-0

Wittgenstein, L. (1978). Remarks on the foundations of mathematics. Blackwell. (Original work published 1956)

Downloads

Published

2023-07-26

Issue

No. 27 (2023): Prometeica - nº 27 (07/2023 - 10/2023)

Section

Articles - Dossier 1

License

Copyright (c) 2023 David Kollosche

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Copyright: Prometeica allows the author (s) to keep their copyrights unrestricted. Prometeica allows the author (s) to retain their publication rights without restriction. Authors should ensure that the article is an original work without fabrication, fraud or plagiarism; does not infringe any copyright or right of ownership of any third party. Authors should also ensure that each one complies with the authorship requirements as recommended by the ICMJE and understand that if the article or part of it is flawed or fraudulent, each author shares responsibility.

Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)

Prometeica - Journal of Philosophy and Sciences is governed by the licencse CC-By-NC

You are free to:

  • Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms:

No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

 

Copyright maintenance

Prometeica allows the author (s) to keep their copyright without restrictions.

Prometeica allows the author (s) to retain their publication rights without restriction.

How to Cite

Kollosche, D. (2023). Towards a critical epistemology of mathematics. Prometeica - Journal of Philosophy and Science, 27, 825-833. https://doi.org/10.34024/prometeica.2023.27.15414