 From the late 1980s on, Shapiro’s and Hellman’s positions have often been treated as the two main structuralist options.  (This is still reflected in Hellman &amp; Shapiro 2019.)  As they are quite different, this already indicates that it is wrong to see “structuralism in the philosophy of mathematics” as a unique position or a unified perspective, even though certain general slogans are shared. Beyond that, other versions of structuralism started to play a role in the late 1980s and early 1990s (including forms of “set-theoretic structuralism” that go back further in time than the 1960s, as we will see). Consequently, the discussions about structuralism have become both richer and more complex.