FOM: Set vs topos debate

[penelope maddy]

>Fortunately Penelope Maddy has realised the error of her ways concerning
>the relationship between set theory and realism, and now studies the
>methodology of set theory. But, as she agreed, this means that the 
>methodology
>of the geometric branches is also worth exploring.

For the record, despite her other errors, Penelope Maddy never thought that
the methodology of branches of mathematics other than set theory was not
worth studying.  (E.g., 'We shouldn't expect the methodology or epistemology
of algebra to be identical to that of set theory any more than we expect the
biologist's or the botanist's basic notions and techniques to be those of
the physicist.'  Realism in math, p. 5)