corrected publication 2021

This traditional view has been challenged by philosophers and mathematicians (e.g., Lakatos ,

In the first two decades of the twenty-first century, an increasing number of philosophers of mathematics embraced maverick positions and initiated collaborations with historians, sociologists, scholars of mathematics education, practicing researchers in mathematics, and researchers from other disciplines to study the philosophical significance of social and cultural diversity, human interaction, and variations in mathematical research practices.

Traditional philosophy had deliberately replaced the varied mathematical research practices with an idealised version; sociology had largely avoided mathematics (Heintz ,

Mathematicians use their computers every day: they write e-mails, download papers from preprint servers, upload their own research on the same servers, log in to online communities dealing with mathematics to ask questions, they typeset their own papers with the typesetting system LaTeX, etc. But is this use of the computer and the internet relevant for questions of philosophy of mathematics about the nature of mathematics, the relationship between mathematics and the physical world, or the epistemic status of mathematical knowledge? The traditional answer to this question is: Not at all. (Löwe ,

The special issue consists of seven papers of which five were presented at the Oxford workshop in December 2017 (the schedule of the workshop is printed at the end of this introduction). The workshop was organised by Joe Corneli, Lorenzo Lane, Ursula Martin, and Fenner Tanswell with crucial administrative support by Sarah Baldwin from the Department of Computer Science at the University of Oxford. The guest editors wish to express their sincere thanks to Baldwin, Corneli, Lane, and Tanswell for their contribution to the success of the workshop.

The paper

Ashton’s paper

Barany’s programmatic paper

In the paper

Rittberg and Friedman consider the practice of paper folding in their paper

In their paper

Finally, Weber’s

Registration.

Ursula Martin:

András Máté:

Tea and Coffee.

Michael Barany:

Lorenzo Lane:

Dinner at Somerville College.

Marcos Cramer:

Henrik Kragh Sørensen, Line Edslev Andersen, & Mikkel Willum Johansen:

Keith Weber:

Tea Break.

Colin Rittberg & Michael Friedman:

Fenner Tanswell:

Lunch.

Dave Murray-Rust:

Matthew Inglis:

Andrew Aberdein:

Tea Break.

Alan Bundy:

Informal Dinner at St Anne’s College.

Slava Gerovitch, Julia Braverman, & Anna Mirny:

Nick de Hoog:

Gila Hanna:

Tea Break.

Joe Corneli:

Alison Pease:

Lunch.

Informal discussions.

Open Access funding provided by Projekt DEAL. The workshop

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

The use of these tools has been studied, e.g., by Greiffenhagen (

For a discussion of various problems with Reichenbach’s context distinction in philosophy of science, cf., e.g., Hoyningen-Huene (

Cf. Martin and Pease (

E.g., Jullien and Soler (

“Other terms than ‘philosophy of mathematical practice’ have been used [...], among them ‘empirical philosophy of mathematics’, ‘practice-based philosophy of mathematics’, ‘(socio-)empirically informed philosophy of mathematics’, or ‘philosophy of real mathematics’. (Löwe ,

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.