Abstract
Meaning is one of the recent terms which have gained great currency in mathematics education. It is generally used as a correlate of individuals' intentions and considered a central element in contemporary accounts of knowledge formation. One important question that arises in this context is the following: if, in one way or another, knowledge rests on the intrinsically subjective intentions and deeds of the individual, how can the objectivity of conceptual mathematical entities be guaranteed? In the first part of this paper, both Peirce's and Husserl's theories of meaning are discussed in light of the aforementioned question. I examine their attempts to reconcile the subjective dimension of knowing with the alleged transcendental nature of mathematical objects. I argue that transcendentalism, either in Peirce's or Husserl's theory of meaning, leads to an irresolvable tension between subject and object. In the final part of the article, I sketch a notion of meaning and conceptual objects based on a semiotic-cultural approach to cognition and knowledge which gives up transcendentalism and instead conveys the notion of contextual objectivity.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Almeder, R.: 1983, ‘Peirce on meaning’, in E. Freeman (ed.), The Relevance of Charles Peirce, Monist Library of Philosophy, La Salle, pp. 328–347.
Bakhtin, M.M.: 1986, Speech Genres and Other Late Essays, University of Texas Press, Austin.
Bégout, B.: 2003, ‘L'ontologie dans les limites de la simple phénoménologie: Husserl et le primat de la théorie phénoménologique de la connaissance’, in D. Fisette and S. Lapointe (eds.), Aux origines de la phénoménologie, Paris, Vrin, pp. 149–178.
Berger, P.L. and Luckmann, T.: 1967, The Social Construction of Reality, Anchor Book, New York.
Brent, J.: 1998, Charles Sanders Peirce. A Life, revised and enlarged edition, Indiana University Press, Blomington.
Cassirer, E.: 1957, The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms, Vol. 3, Oxford University Press, London.
CP = Peirce, Ch. S.: 1931–1958, Collected Papers, Vols. I–VIII, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
D'Amore, B.: 2001, ‘Une contribution au débat sur les concepts et les objets mathématiques: la position “naïve” dans une théorie “réaliste” contre le modèle “anthropologique” dans une théorie “pragmatique”, in A. Gagatsis (ed.), Learning in Mathematics and Science and Educational Technology, Vol. 1, pp. 131–162.
Dewey, J.: 1946, ‘Peirce's theory of linguistic signs, thought, and meaning’, The Journal of Philosophy 43(4), 85–95.
Dörfler, W.: 2002, ‘Formation of mathematical objects as decision making’, Mathematical Thinking and Learning 4(4), 337–350.
Duval, R.: 1998, ‘Signe et objet, I et II’, Annales de didactique et de sciences cognitives, IREM de Strasbourg, Vol. 6, pp. 139–196.
Eagleton, T.: 2003, After Theory, Penguin Books, London.
Eco, U.: 1999, Kant and the Platypus. Essays on Language and Cognition, Harcourt, San Diego/New York/London.
Floridi, L.: 1994, ‘Scepticism and the search for knowledge: A Peirceish answer to a Kantian doubt’, Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 30(3), 543–573.
Føllesdal, D.: 1969, ‘Husserl's notion of noema’, The Journal of Philosophy 66(20), 680–687.
Furinghetti, F.: 1997, ‘History of mathematics, mathematics education, school practice: Case studies in linking different domains’, For the Learning of Mathematics 17(1), 55– 61.
Furinghetti, F. and Radford, L.: 2002, ‘Historical conceptual developments and the teaching of mathematics: From phylogenesis and ontogenesis theory to classroom practice’, in L. English (ed.), Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education, Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey, pp. 631–654.
Godino, J.D. and Batanero, C.: 1999, ‘The meaning of mathematical objects as analysis units for didactic of mathematics’, in I. Schwank (ed.), Proceedings of the First Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, http://www.fmd.uni-osnabrueck.de/ebooks/erme/cerme1-proceedings/cerme1-proceedings.html.
Husserl, E.: 1890–1908/1994, Early Writings in the Philosophy of Logic and Mathematics, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Husserl, E.: 1891/1972, Philosophie de l'arithmétique, translated by J. English, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.
Husserl, E.: 1900/1970, Logical Investigations, translated by J.N. Findlay, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
Husserl, E.: 1913/1931, Ideas. General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology, translated by W.R. Boyce Gibson, Third Edition, 1958, The Macmillan Company, New York.
Husserl, E.: 1935, Letter to Lucien Lévy-Bruhl, Husserl Archives, Leuven.
Husserl, E.: 1973, Experience and Judgment, Northwestern University Press, Evanston.
Husserl, E.: 1989, Origin of Geometry, Introduction by Jacques Derrida, translated by John P. Leavey, Jr., University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln and London.
Husserl, E.: 2001, Sur l'intersubjectivité II, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.
Ilyenkov, E.: 1977a, ‘The concept of the ideal’, in Philosophy in the USSR: Problems of Dialectical Materialism, Progress Publishers, Moscow.
Ilyenkov, E.V.: 1977b, Dialectical Logic, Progress Publishers, Moscow.
Lektorsky, V.A.: 1984, Subject, Object, Cognition, Progress Publishers, Moscow.
Leont'ev, A.N.: 1978, Activity, Consciousness, and Personality, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
Luria, A.R.: 1984, Sensación y percepción, Ediciones Martínez Roca, Barcelona.
McIntyre, R. and Smith, D.W.: 1976, ‘Husserl's equation of meaning and noema’, The Monist 59, 115–132.
Marx, K. and Engels, F.: 1968, Theses on Feuerbach, Selected Works, International Publishers, New York, pp. 28–30.
Merleau-Ponty, M.: 1960, Signes, Gallimard, Paris.
Nabonnand, P.: 2004, ‘Applications des mathématiques au début du vingtième siècle’, in Coray, D., et al. (eds.), One Hundred Years of L'Enseignement Mathématique, L'Enseignement Mathématique, Monographie No. 39, pp. 229–249.
Nesher, D.: 1997, ‘Peircean realism: Truth as the meaning of cognitive signs representing external reality’, Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 33(1), 201–257.
Otte, M.: 2003, Meaning and Mathematics. Pre-print. Institut für Didaktik der Mathematik, Universität Bielefeld.
Otte, M.: forthcoming, ‘Does mathematics have objects? In what sense?’ Synthese.
Parker, K.: 1994, ‘Peirce's semeiotic and ontology’, Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 30(1), 51–75.
Pea, R.D.: 1993, ‘Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education’, in G. Salomon (ed.), Distributed Cognitions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 47–87.
Piaget, J.: 1953, The Origin of Intelligence in the Child, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
Radford, L.: 2000, ‘Signs and meanings in students' emergent algebraic thinking: A semiotic analysis’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 42(3), 237–268.
Radford, L.: 2002a, ‘The object of representations: Between wisdom and certainty’, in F. Hitt (ed.), Representations and Mathematics Visualization, Departamento de matemática educativa Cinvestav-IPN, Mexico, pp. 219–240.
Radford, L.: 2002b, ‘The seen, the spoken and the written. A semiotic approach to the problem of objectification of mathematical knowledge’, For the Learning of Mathematics 22(2), 14–23.
Radford, L.: 2003a, ‘On culture and mind. A post-Vygotskian semiotic perspective, with an example from Greek mathematical thought’, in M. Anderson, A. Sáenz-Ludlow, S. Zellweger and V. Cifarelli (eds.), Educational Perspectives on Mathematics as Semiosis: From Thinking to Interpreting to Knowing, Legas Publishing, Ottawa, pp. 49–79.
Radford, L.: 2003b, ‘Gestures, speech, and the sprouting of signs’, Mathematical Thinking and Learning 5(1), 37–70.
Radford, L.: 2003c, ‘On the epistemological limits of language. Mathematical knowledge and social practice during the Renaissance’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 52(2), 123–150.
Radford, L.: 2004, Cose sensibili, essenze, oggetti matematici ed altre ambiguità [Sensible Things, Essences, Mathematical Objects and other ambiguities], La Matematica e la sua didattica, No. 1, 4–23. (An English version is available at: http://www.laurentian.ca/educ/lradford/).
Ricoeur, P.: 1996, A Key to Edmund Husserl's Ideas I, Marquette University Press, Milwaukee, WI.
Rosenthal, S.: 1983, ‘Meaning as habit: Some systematic implications of Peirce's pragmatism’, in E. Freeman (ed.), The Relevance of Charles Peirce, Monist Library of Philosophy, La Salle, pp. 312–326.
Sapir, E.: 1949, Selected Writings in Language, Culture and Personality, D.G. Mandelbaum (ed.), 5th printing, 1968, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.
Sfard, A.: 2000, ‘Symbolizing mathematical reality into being – or how mathematical discourse and mathematical objects create each other’, in P. Cobb et al. (eds.), Symbolizing and Communicating in Mathematics Classrooms, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, New Jersey and London, pp. 37–98.
Sierpinska, A.: 1998, ‘Three epistemologies, three views of classroom communication: Constructivism, sociocultural approaches, interactionism’, in H. Steinbring, M. Bartolini Bussi and A. Sierpinska (eds.), Language et Communication in the Mathematics Classroom, The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, Virginia, pp. 30–62.
Smith, J.: 1983, ‘Community and reality’, in E. Freeman (ed.), The Relevance of Charles Peirce, Monist Library of Philosophy, La Salle, pp. 38–58.
Vološinov, V.N.: 1976, Freudianism: A Critical Sketch. Translated by I. R. Titunik, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis.
Wartofsky, M.: 1979, Models, Representation and the Scientific Understanding, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Radford, L. The Anthropology of Meaning. Educ Stud Math 61, 39–65 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-7136-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-7136-7