âThis essay is adapted from Massimo Mazzottiâs 2023 book Reactionary Mathematics: A Genealogy of Purityâ
âmathematics and politics as entangledâ
âmathematical concepts and methods are anything but timeless or neutral; they define what âreasonâ is, and what it is not, and thus the concrete possibilities of political actionâ
âThe technical and political are two sides of the same coinâand changes in notions like mathematical rigor, provability, and necessity simultaneously constitute changes in our political imaginationâ
âIn 1806, the Kingdom of Naples was occupied by a French army and integrated into Napoleonâs imperial systemâ
âa distinctive mathematical culture that was hegemonic in that kingdom for several decadesâfrom the late 1790s to the 1830s. Contemporaries called it the Neapolitan synthetic school. The name referred to synthetic (or pure) geometry, a geometry that does not use coordinates and algebraic formulas to study figures and solve problemsâ
âWhat the Neapolitans most adamantly did not trust was what they called, not without irony, the âvery modern mathematics.â This body of knowledge, associated mainly with France, was characterized by the rapid advancements of an algebraized form of infinitesimal calculus and by its stunning and far-reaching practical applicationsâ
âIt had severed its connections with Euclidean geometry, and was referred to as âanalysisââa term that, in this context, meant a vast array of algebraic methods and algorithmic procedures that could be used to represent how things change, whether those things were, say, the trajectory of a cannonball or agricultural productivityâ
âThey often used metaphors of sight to make this point: synthetic geometry allowed practitioners to see with clarity, and this is why their results could be trusted; analysts were blind when they manipulated their formulasâ
âWe can see an early and radical manifestation of this anxiety in revolutionary Naplesâin its bizarre and apparently backward attempt to return to a Greek-like pure geometry. The champion of this new old mathematics was Nicola Fergola (1753â1824), the charismatic and mystically inclined leader of a group of mathematicians and scientists who understood themselves as the last heirs of an ancient traditionâ
âThe tradition Fergola invoked was largely an inventionâan imaginary mathematical lineage that ran through ancient Greece, late antiquity, and Christian Europe, all the way down to these self-proclaimed final paladinsâ
âFollowing the example of mathematicians like Condorcet, analysts were aiming to create a repertoire of finite and infinite algebraic methods that were abstract and general enough to apply to any kind of problem, be it in geometry, physics, economics, or even politicsâ
âThe synthetics would say that it was legitimate only when they could see the geometry behind the formulas. But for complex problems this was not always possible, and in these instances algebra was blind; there was no way to reconstruct the geometrical meaning of the algebraic operations that led to the solutionâ
âFor the analysts, this was irrelevant: algebra captured the essential relations expressed by the terms of the problem, which then served to guide the mathematician toward the solution. For the synthetics, by contrast, a solution to the original geometrical problem could only be geometrical in nature; and so, what the analysts were offering were not solutions but meaningless numbersâ
âWhile the analysts strove for maximum generality, the synthetics argued for the specificity and locality of all mathematical methodsâ
âThe syntheticsâ world was, so to speak, epistemologically stratified. They recognized many kinds of truth, and thought it essential to keep them separated from one another. The truth of the geometer, they claimed, has nothing to do with the truths of the theologian, historian, or politicianâ
âFor the synthetics, mathematical knowledge was the product of a process of recognition, the imperfect representation of metaphysical states of affairs that the gifted mathematician would be able to glimpseâ
âFor the analysts, mathematical reasoning was just a particular case of analytic reasoningâcalculus, especially, was where analytic reason could be best seen in action. They saw themselves as the standard bearers of modernization and the promoters of rational action across both scientific and social lifeâ
âAnalysts enthusiastically compared their method to the clunky workings of a machineâ
âway of arguing for the algorithmic nature and therefore accessibility of the method, as its standardized procedures could be easily learned, and deployed across different contextsâ
âthe knowledge of methods and their relative âstrengthâ in getting useful results, including approximate ones, through the sheer power of calculationâ
âMathematicians in the 18th century had achieved stunning results in algebra and infinitesimal calculus, but to Cauchyâs eyes, they had been too casual in how they defined their concepts and devised and applied their methodsâ
âCauchy was not interested in bringing back synthetic geometry. Rather, he aimed to reinterpret analysis within a new logical framework in which every concept and procedure would be logically justifiedâ
âHe set boundaries, in other words, within which certain techniques could be legitimately deployed. The modern mathematicians were those who, following Cauchy, could discipline themselves through a new kind of technical precisionâ
âFergola and his students were initially marginal to Neapolitan scientific life. Their geometrical program was perceived as outdated, while the world of the salons scoffed at their baroque religious devotion and ascetic lifestyle. But this changed dramatically after the storming of the Bastille, when they quickly acquired an unprecedented cultural relevanceâ
âIn 1794, the discovery of a Jacobin conspiracy to overthrow the monarchy sent the court into a state of panic. The Jacobins would succeed five years later, in 1799, when Naples became a republic. The leading revolutionaries were mathematicians. The chief conspirator of 1794, and the first president of the republic, Carlo Lauberg (1752â1834), was a teacher of chemistry and mathematicsâ
âIt is no accident that almost every noteworthy figure in Neapolitan Jacobinism received some mathematical training: a basic understanding of analysis was an essential part of their worldview, as were republicanism, egalitarianism, and anticlericalismâ
âThe very structure of their secret societyâa network of Jacobin clubsâwas a working model of how analysis could be deployed in matters of social organizationâ
âthey had become convinced that their vision of a just and equal society could be realized only through the universal implementation of analysis, which they understood as a revolutionary mathematicsâ
âThis would detach politics from its metaphysical assumptions, turning it into a matter of rational and transparent administrationâ
âThe analytic revolution could now be expected to transform society by making it possible to operationalize âthe will of the people.ââ
âA programmatically impure mathematics, it was a universal language and reasoning style that could be applied across disciplinary boundaries to bring about immediate social changeâ
âThe counterrevolutionaries reacted by turning these analytic features into the âJacobin machine,â a deadly device for the control of public opinion, political life, and the stateâ
âIn Naples, the Jacobin machine was viewed as foreign, disconnected from local political traditionsâ
âin France too, its effect was seen as one of contamination, this time from the inside. In both cases, the purity of the body politic had to be defended from a malignant mechanical-analytic threatâ
âMany former revolutionaries, in France as in Naples, had turned the question of modernization into a technical problem, and had refashioned their personas and social function in terms of scientific neutrality and technocratic efficiencyâ
âHistorian Ken Alder has aptly labeled them âtechno-Jacobins.ââ
âIn this normalized context, mathematics was a neutral tool, the distinctive expertise of technical elites who served the state. The direct connection between mathematics, egalitarianism, and republicanism, built through the notion of a universal analytic reason, had been severed, and with it vanished the very possibility of a revolutionary mathematicsâ
âLed by Fergolaâs students, the synthetic school fought against the technical elites of the modern state, mostly civil engineers and statisticians, for scientific hegemonyâ
âThe new technical experts had been charged with changing the kingdomâs physical and social landscape accordingly. Technical disciplines such as statistics or topography became key sites for negotiation, collaboration, and conflict between landed elites and the central government. On this technical terrain, the new experts would continuously clash with the syntheticsâ
âThe technicians who supported the stateâs modernizing action now argued for a mathematical reconciliation. What the two groups were defending, it was now believed, were simply two different ways of looking at mathematics, which should not be seen as opposed to each other but rather as complementaryâ
âThe synthetics approach was useful for didactic purposes, while the analytic one was best suited for research and the discovery of new mathematical truthsâ
âThis normalized reconstruction eliminated revolutionary and reactionary scientific aberrations, emphasized continuity in the history of mathematics, and aligned with the political life of Restoration-age Naples, which was hegemonized by new landed elites and their liberal and constitutional ambitionsâ
âThe Jacobinâs analytic reason was universal, active, calculative, individual, a priori, and ahistorical; it was a completely autonomous reason that, when not obstructed, could truthfully describe and legitimately change the worldâthrough revolutionary action, if necessaryâ
âThe reason of the synthetic, by contrast, was local, passive, intuitive, collective, a posteriori, and eminently suited to historical thinking; it was a dependent reason, whose outcomes needed to be warranted by external sources of legitimation like tradition, custom, experience, religion, and metaphysical principles. It was, as such, a reactionary reason that envisioned the return to order as a return to hierarchyâorder produced by subordinationâ
âIt is only by contrast to an abhorred revolutionary reason, political theorist Corey Robin reminds us, that the invocation of ancient forms of wisdom can captivate the modern mindâ
âWhen we craft logico-mathematical concepts and techniques, we design ways of ordering the natural and social world. These ways of ordering the world open up certain possibilities for actionâincluding political actionâwhile closing down othersâ
âJacobin mathematics was deployed to critique and radically transform the existing social order, empowering traditionally subordinate social groups and bringing them into the space of politics as legitimate autonomous agents. The mathematics of the synthetics was designed to deny this possibility, to turn it, in fact, into a logical impossibilityâhence it was, strictly speaking, a reactionary mathematicsâ
Navigation
Backlinks
There are no backlinks to this post.