It&#x27;s possible that a mathematician with philosophical commitments is more likely to be a Platonist than a formalist, but I suspect that most mathematicians are neither (&quot;Philosophy is for the philosophers&quot;).  The so-called &quot;naive&quot; view that most mathematicians may be described as having (&quot;I&#x27;m discovering something real when I prove a theorem&quot;, &quot;Mathematics is objective&quot;, and so on) certainly sounds similar to the language used by Platonists, but I have yet to run into a mathematician who is comfortable with the logical conclusions of a strict Platonism.  In particular, there are epistemological problems with Platonism (how can we know anything about non-physical entities?) that cause problems in the justification of mathematics and would be nice to be able to ignore.