Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1812.00226

Leibniz's well-founded fictions and their interpretations

Jacques Bair·Piotr Blaszczyk·Robert Ely·Peter Heinig·Mikhail G. Katz
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Leibniz used the term fiction in conjunction with infinitesimals. What kind of fictions they were exactly is a subject of scholarly dispute. The position of Bos and Mancosu contrasts with that of Ishiguro and Arthur. Leibniz's own views, expressed in his published articles and correspondence, led Bos to distinguish between two methods in Leibniz's work: (A) one exploiting classical `exhaustion' arguments, and (B) one exploiting inassignable infinitesimals together with a law of continuity. Of particular interest is evidence stemming from Leibniz's work Nouveaux Essais sur l'Entendement Humain as well as from his correspondence with Arnauld, Bignon, Dagincourt, Des Bosses, and Varignon. A careful examination of the evidence leads us to the opposite conclusion from Arthur's. We analyze a hitherto unnoticed objection of Rolle's concerning the lack of justification for extending axioms and operations in geometry and analysis from the ordinary domain to that of infinitesimal calculus, and reactions to it by Saurin and Leibniz. A newly released 1705 manuscript by Leibniz (Puisque des personnes...) currently in the process of digitalisation, sheds light on the nature of Leibnizian inassignable infinitesimals. In a pair of 1695 texts Leibniz made it clear that his incomparable magnitudes violate Euclid's Definition V.4, a.k.a. the Archimedean property, corroborating the non-Archimedean construal of the Leibnizian calculus. Keywords: Archimedean property; assignable vs inassignable quantity; Euclid's Definition V.4; infinitesimal; law of continuity; law of homogeneity; logical fiction; Nouveaux Essais; pure fiction; quantifier-assisted paraphrase; syncategorematic; transfer principle; Arnauld; Bignon; Des Bosses; Rolle; Saurin; Varignon

Explore related subjects

math.HOmath.CAmath.LO

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jacques Bair, Piotr Blaszczyk, Robert Ely, Peter Heinig, Mikhail G. Katz. 2019-02-11. Leibniz's well-founded fictions and their interpretations. https://doi.org/10.15330/ms.49.2.186-224

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The Stairs of Reconciliation: A Mathematical Tourist in Graz

Inside the Grazer Burg, two late-Gothic stone flights rise about distinct spindles, overlap, share several treads, and separate again. Their plan is governed not by a coaxial double helix but, to first approximation, by two intersecting circles. This elementary geometry yields a model of recurrent meeting and makes explicit the compatibility conditions that meeting requires. It also leads to a second object that geometers call a double spiral staircase - the helicoid - and to a useful distinction between resemblance and identity. The staircase becomes a meditation on how paths, models, and disciplines can meet without becoming the same.

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

On the Reconstruction of SAS from Other Triangle Congruence Criteria

Starting from a Hilbert plane and removing the Side-Angle-Side (SAS) congruence axiom, we investigate to what extent SAS can be recovered synthetically from the remaining classical triangle congruence criteria. We show that the Angle-Side-Angle criterion, together with a ray correspondence principle corresponding to Theorem 13 of Hilbert's \emph{Grundlagen der Geometrie}, suffices to reconstruct SAS. We further show that both the Side-Side-Side and the Side-Angle-Angle criteria also suffice, once combined with the ray correspondence principle and suitable auxiliary principles -- the existence of midpoints and a hypotenuse-angle criterion for right triangles in the first case, and the existence of angle bisectors, the congruence of supplements of congruent angles, and the Pons Asinorum in the second. Although the two routes rely on auxiliary principles of different character, we show that they converge on a single final argument once a common hypotenuse-angle criterion is established. A metamathematical analysis, based on an explicit model adapted from Hilbert's own independence construction, complements these reconstructions: it shows that the ray correspondence principle alone cannot reconstruct any of the classical criteria, and that the Pons Asinorum and the hypotenuse-angle criterion are each independent of the remaining auxiliary principles used in their respective reconstructions. The resulting picture is not a formal hierarchy of the congruence criteria, but it does show that the Angle-Side-Angle reconstruction rests on a provably more economical basis than those obtained from Side-Side-Side or Side-Angle-Angle.

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

Come for the vibe, stay for the math

This article describes our experiences in mathematical outreach over the past decade. We talk about specific activities, but also general principles that we've learned along the way.

math.HO↗