Hume's Conception of Geometry and the Role of Contradiction

dc.contributor.advisorMiren F Boehm
dc.contributor.committeememberMichael N Liston
dc.contributor.committeememberRichard J Tierney
dc.creatorPaz, Sofia Remedios
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-16T19:08:29Z
dc.date.available2025-01-16T19:08:29Z
dc.date.issued2019-08-01
dc.description.abstractDavid Hume’s account of geometry can seem puzzling as he claims that geometry is inexact and demonstrable. Graciela de Pierris argues for an interpretation that explains why Hume sees geometry as inexact and, yet, demonstrable. However, she doesn’t consider Hume’s description of relations of ideas found in the Enquiry. Hume distinguishes between matters of fact and relations of idea by checking to see if there is a contradiction with the denial of a proposition. Geometry is categorized as relations of idea, so the denials of geometric propositions cannot be conceivable and must imply a contradiction. I will argue that De Pierris’ account depicts definitions of geometric objects in such a way as to leave open the possibility for some relations of ideas where the denial of their proposition does not imply a contradiction, something Hume clearly did not intend.
dc.identifier.urihttp://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/87847
dc.relation.replaceshttps://dc.uwm.edu/etd/3321
dc.subjectContradiction
dc.subjectDavid Hume
dc.subjectGeometry
dc.subjectHume's Fork
dc.subjectRelation of Ideas
dc.titleHume's Conception of Geometry and the Role of Contradiction
dc.typethesis
thesis.degree.disciplinePhilosophy
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
thesis.degree.nameMaster of Arts

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Paz_uwm_0263m_12484.pdf
Size:
195.75 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Main File