What do mathematicians mean when they use terms such as 'deep', 'elegant', and 'beautiful'? By applying empirical methods developed by social psychologists, we demonstrate that mathematicians' appraisals of proofs vary on four dimensions: aesthetics, intricacy, utility, and precision. We pay particular attention to mathematical beauty and show that, contrary to the classical view, beauty and simplicity are almost entirely unrelated in mathematics.
Funding
This work was supported by a Royal Society Worshipful Company of Actuaries Research Fellowship.
History
School
Science
Department
Mathematics Education Centre
Published in
Philosophia Mathematica
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
87 - 109
Citation
INGLIS, M. and ABERDEIN, A., 2014. Beauty is not simplicity: an analysis of mathematicians' proof appraisals. Philosophia Mathematica, 23 (1), pp.87-109
This work is made available according to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence. Full details of this licence are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Publication date
2014
Notes
This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Philosophia Mathematica following peer review. The version of record INGLIS, M. and ABERDEIN, A., 2014. Beauty is not simplicity: an analysis of mathematicians' proof appraisals. Philosophia Mathematica, 23 (1), pp. 87 - 109 is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/philmat/nku014.
This paper is closed access until 26th July 2015.