Constructivism Is Difficult

8Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In a recent issue of this MONTHLY, Fred Richman [8] discussed existence proofs. Richman's conclusion, as I understood it, was that once a mathematician sees the distinction between constructive and nonconstructive mathematics, he or she will choose the former. That conclusion, if extrapolated further than Professor Richman intended, suggests that any mathematician can learn constructivism easily if he or she so desires. But in fact constructivism is unusually difficult to learn. Learning most mathematical subjects merely involves adding to one's knowledge, but learning constructivism involves modifying all aspects of one's knowledge: theorems, methods of reasoning, technical vocabulary, and even the use of everyday words that do not seem technical, such as "or". I discuss, in the language of mainstream mathematicians, some of those modifications; perhaps newcomers to constructivism will not be so overwhelmed by it if they know what kinds of difficulties to expect.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schechter, E. (2001). Constructivism Is Difficult. American Mathematical Monthly, 108(1), 50–54. https://doi.org/10.2307/2695675

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free