I. I had dissented from Stewart's assertion that
mathematical truth is hypothetical, or depends upon
arbitrary definitions; since we understand by an {108}
hypothesis a supposition, not only which we may make, but
may abstain from making, or may replace by a different
supposition; whereas the definitions and hypotheses of
geometry are necessarily such as they are, and cannot be
altered or excluded. The reviewer (p. 84) informs us that he
understands Stewart, when he speaks of hypotheses and
definitions being the foundation of geometry, to speak of
the hypothesis that real objects correspond to our
geometrical definitions. '_If_ a crystal be an exact
hexahedron, the geometrical properties of the hexahedron may
be predicated of that crystal.' To this I reply,--that such
hypotheses as this are the grounds of our applications of
geometrical truths to real objects, but can in no way be
said to be the foundation of the truths themselves;--that I
do not think that the sense which the reviewer gives was
Stewart's meaning;--but that if it was, this view of the use
of mathematics does not at all affect the question which
both he and I proposed to discuss, which was, the ground of
mathematical certainty. I may add, that whether a crystal be
an exact hexahedron, is a matter of observation and
measurement, not of definition. I think the reader can have
no difficulty in seeing how little my doctrine is affected
by the connexion on which the reviewer thus insists. I have
asserted that the proposition which affirms the square on
the diagonal of a rectangle to be equal to the squares on
two sides, does not rest upon arbitrary hypotheses; the
objector answers, that the proposition that the square on
the diagonal _of this page_ is equal to the squares on the
sides, depends upon the arbitrary hypothesis that the page
is a rectangle. Even if this fact were a matter of arbitrary
hypothesis, what could it have to do with the general
geometrical proposition? How could a single fact, observed
or hypothetical, affect a universal and necessary truth,
which would be equally true if the fact were false? If there
be nothing arbitrary or hypothetical in geometry till we
come to such steps in its application, it is plain that the
truths themselves are not hypothetical; which is the
question for us to decide. {109}
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account