Abstract

In this paper, we focus on the development of geometric cognition. We argue that to understand how geometric cognition has been constituted, one must appreciate not only individual cognitive factors, such as phylogenetically ancient and ontogenetically early core cognitive systems, but also the social history of the spread and use of cognitive artifacts. In particular, we show that the development of Greek mathematics, enshrined in Euclid’s Elements, was driven by the use of two tightly intertwined cognitive artifacts: the use of lettered diagrams; and the creation of linguistic formulae (namely non-compositional fixed strings of words used repetitively within authors and between them). Together, these artifacts formed the professional language of geometry. In this respect, the case of Greek geometry clearly shows that explanations of geometric reasoning have to go beyond the confines of methodological individualism to account for how the distributed practice of artifact use has stabilized over time. This practice, as we suggest, has also contributed heavily to the understanding of what mathematical proof is; classically, it has been assumed that proofs are not merely deductively correct but also remain invariant over various individuals sharing the same cognitive practice. Cognitive artifacts in Greek geometry constrained the repertoire of admissible inferential operations, which made these proofs inter-subjectively testable and compelling. By focusing on the cognitive operations on artifacts, we also stress that mental mechanisms that contribute to these operations are still poorly understood, in contrast to those mechanisms which drive symbolic logical inference.

Highlights

  • Cognitive science increasingly focuses on the role of cognitive artifacts in cognitive practices

  • We argue that mathematics could not remain as stable a cognitive practice as it is, were it not for the widespread practice of constraining reasoning patterns by external cognitive artifacts

  • While Netz has clearly underlined the intertwining of lettered diagrams and linguistic formulae, his cognitive history of geometry fails to account for inferential operations on cognitive artifacts, which allowed Greek adepts of geometry to perform their proofs

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Cognitive science increasingly focuses on the role of cognitive artifacts in cognitive practices. We claim that the necessity and generality of the geometric proof rely on the distributed practice that includes dedicated cognitive artifacts and cannot be reduced to properties of individual cognitive capacities. The historical insight into the development of proofs in geometry provided in this paper shows that mathematical epistemology of the proof is deeply enculturated, and relies on joint practices on cognitive artifacts. It undermines purely individualist accounts of mathematical cognition, typically espoused by mathematical Platonists, such as Roger Penrose (1996). We claim that the study of the enculturation of mathematical cognition can be informative for the epistemology of mathematics and not just for its historical development

Desiderata for the Study of Geometric Cognition
Individualistic Cognition of Geometry and Beyond
Case Study
Cognitive Artifacts of Euclidean Geometry
Drawing Inferences Using Diagrams: in Search of Operations
The Emergence of Epistemic Virtues of Euclidean Geometry
How to Constrain Epistemology Without Ontology
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call