Reciprocal Theorems in Euclid (from the mediatic point of view)
Authors
-
José Seoane
Universidad de la República
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9571-3139
Abstract
The Euclidean demonstration is paradigmatically heterogeneous: its communication combines text and diagram. If we are interested in studying it from the communicational or mediatic point of view, it is necessary to decipher the cooperation between such media and the dynamic expression-structure. This intellectual sensitivity inaugurates a rich agenda. Such an agenda includes, among others, the question of the expressive/structural behavior of the Euclidean demonstration in various special contexts. For example, how does such heterogeneity manifest itself in the case of proofs of reciprocal theorems? An examination (still partial and preliminary) allows the identification of certain relevant mediatic features.Keywords:
Euclid, geometric proof, expressive heterogeneity, inferential heterogeneity, DiagramsReferences
Chateaubriand, O. (2005). Logical Forms, Part II – Logic, Language, and Knowledge. Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência.
De Risi, V. (2021). Euclid’s Common Notions and the Theory of Equivalence. Foundations of Science 26, 301-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-020-09694-w
Euclides. (1908a). The thirteen books of the Elements (Traducción y comentario Thomas L. Heath, vol. 1). Dover.
___. (1908b). The thirteen books of the Elements (Traducción y comentario Thomas L. Heath, vol. 2). Dover.
___. (1991). Elementos (Libros I-IV) (Traducción M. L. Puertas Castaños, introducción Vega Reñón). Gredos.
Giaquinto, M. (2008). Visualizing in Mathematics. En P. Mancosu (Ed.), The Philosophy of Mathematical Practice (pp. 22-42). Oxford UP.
Lassalle Casanave, A. y Seoane, J. (2016). Las demostraciones por absurdo y la Noción Común 5. En E. Caorsi, R. Navia, y F. Sautte (Orgs.), Significado y negación: escritos lógicos, semánticos y epistemológicos (pp. 39-50). Mastergraf.
Macbeth, D. (2010). Diagrammatic Reasoning in Euclid’s Elements. En B. Van Kerkhove, J. P. Van Bendegem y J. De Vuyst (Eds.), Philosophical Perspectives on Mathematical Practice, Texts in Philosophy (vol. 12). College Publications.
Manders, K. (2008a). The Euclidian Diagram. En P. Mancosu (Ed.), The Philosophy of Mathematical Practice (pp. 80-133). Oxford UP.
___. (2008b). El diagrama Euclidiano. En A. Peláez (Comp.), Diagramas: fundamentos y aplicaciones (pp. 319-400, inédito).
Netz, R. (1999a). The Shaping of Deduction in Greek Mathematics. Cambridge UP.
___. (1999b). Proclus’ division of the mathematical proposition into parts: how and why was it formulated?. The Classical Quarterly 49, 282-303. https://doi.org/10.1093/cq/49.1.282.
Proclo (1970). A Comentary on the First Book of Euclid´s Elements (Traducción, introducción y notas de G. R. Morrow). Princeton UP.
Seoane, J. (2016). Demostraciones heterogéneas: repensando las preguntas. Representaciones 12(2), 87-108.
Seoane, J. (2021a). Heterogeneidad euclidiana. O que nos faz pensar, 29(49), 78-99. http://doi.org/10.32334/oqnfp.2021n49a797.
___. (2021b). Demostración euclidiana y ambigüedad perceptual. En G. Seco, F. Sautter, O. Esquisabel y W.
Sanz (Eds.), De Mathematicae atque Philosophicae Elegantia: Notas festivas para Abel Lassalle Casanave (pp. 261-273). College Publications.
___. (2022). Estilo polimodal en la demostración euclidiana. Diánoia 67(89), 39-65.http://doi.org/10.22201/iifs.18704913e.2022.89.1903.
Vega Reñón, L. (1991). Introducción general. En Euclides, Elementos (pp. 7-184). Gredos.
Weaver, G. (1988). Reading proofs with understanding. Theoria 54(1), 31-47.
