Applicability, idealization, and mathematization
In this thesis I provide a study of the applicability of mathematics. My starting point is the account of applicability offered in Hartry Field's book Science without numbers and arising from the nominalistic project carried out therein. By examining the limitations and shortcomings of Field's account, I develop a new one. My account retains the advantages and insights of Field's and avoids its difficulties, which are essentially due to its being incomplete and too restrictive. Field's account is incomplete because it does not deal with the nature and use of idealization in science. Field only describes how mathematics is applied to highly idealized physical theories (e.g. ones containing postulates which are untestable or contradicted by experiment) but he does not explain how idealization arises and why idealized theories are relevant to the actual experimental investigation of empirical phenomena. I offer such an explanation for an elementary scientific theory to which the more complex examples discussed by Field can be reduced. Even in presence of an analysis of idealization, Field's account of applicability remains problematic. The reason is that it characterizes the role of mathematics in applications
Rizza, Davide
Applicability, idealization, and mathematization. In this thesis I provide a study of the applicability of mathematics. My starting point is the account of applicability offered in Hartry Field's book Science without numbers and arising from the nominalistic project carried out therein. By examining the limitations and shortcomings of Field's account, I develop a new one. My account retains the advantages and insights of Field's and avoids its difficulties, which are essentially due to its being incomplete and too restrictive. Field's account is incomplete because it does not deal with the nature and use of idealization in science. Field only describes how mathematics is applied to highly idealized physical theories (e.g. ones containing postulates which are untestable or contradicted by experiment) but he does not explain how idealization arises and why idealized theories are relevant to the actual experimental investigation of empirical phenomena. I offer such an explanation for an elementary scientific theory to which the more complex examples discussed by Field can be reduced. Even in presence of an analysis of idealization, Field's account of applicability remains problematic. The reason is that it characterizes the role of mathematics in applications
applicability provide study applicability mathematics start_point account applicability offer field book science without number arise project carry therein examine limitation shortcoming field account develop_new account retain advantage insight field avoids difficulty essentially due incomplete restrictive field account incomplete deal nature use science field describe mathematics apply highly idealized physical theory contain postulate contradict explain arises idealized theory relevant actual experimental_investigation empirical phenomenon offer_explanation elementary scientific_theory complex example discuss field reduce even presence analysis field account applicability remain_problematic reason role mathematics application