FOM: attitudes of core mathematicians and applied model theorists toward f.o.m.

[Steve Stevenson]

Mark Steiner writes:
 > <snip>
 > 	I think that core mathematicians should appreciate that
 > foundationalists are uniquely capable of conveying to others the great
 > interest of mathematics itself.  The same goes for philosophy; a more
 > reasonable role for philosophy vis a vis science is to interpret and
 > analyze scientific ideas in such a way as to highlight their
 > "intellectual interest" and importance.    In doing so, we need not go
 > overboard, as Kant did, and proclaim that our favorite scientific theory
 > is inevitable or a priori.

I think this is a great point and perhaps hints at another point:
"foundationalists,"  regardless of discipline, probably have more in
common that they know. It wasn't until 1948 that philosophy of science 
first asked (Hempel) what the scientists themselves taught in the way
of the basics of science and how they (scientists) actually go about
doing theory. Much suprise.... It took another 30 years for philosophy 
to act on the 1948 insights.

best regards,

steve