This paper reconceptualizes symbolic zero not as a self-evident universal, but as a culturally constructed cognitive object. By integrating developmental studies, neurocognitive data, and Valsiner’s cultural psychology, it reveals that symbolic zero remains dependent on human scaffolding even at advanced levels of abstraction. Rather than merely a tool, symbolic zero functions as a site of epistemic tension—between embodiment and symbol, rule and disruption—thus opening a path to rethink mathematical objects as active products of human meaning-making.
This paper revisits the well-studied topic of symbolic zero by attending to its less examined dependence on human construction. While zero often appears as a fixed and universal element in mathematical discourse, its use and understanding continue to rely on developmental, educational, and cultural scaffolding. Drawing from cognitive studies and cultural psychology, the discussion follows how symbolic zero becomes thinkable, operable, and reflective—not only as a technical placeholder, but also as a site of conceptual tension and creative possibility.
The conceptual development of zero unfolds in progressive stages: from perceiving absence, to understanding it as a quantified empty set, to finally employing it as a symbolic placeholder. This symbolic stage, crucial for abstract operations, is not cognitively transparent but acquired through context-specific instruction and cognitive scaffolding.
Empirical studies on children’s numerical development demonstrate that grasping zero as a meaningful quantity requires targeted teaching. Neurocognitive research further reveals that adults, even when manipulating symbolic zero fluently, implicitly rely on trained non-symbolic representations. These findings contest the Platonic view of symbolic numbers as universal abstractions and reassert the necessity of human construction in mathematical cognition.
Drawing on Jaan Valsiner’s Gegenstandstheorie, symbolic zero can be understood as a quasi-existent entity—absent from the material world, yet active in human reasoning. Its conceptual behavior corresponds to three foundational processes in cultural psychology: normativity, which maintains systemic coherence and defines the field of legitimate action; resistance, which challenges established boundaries and introduces heterogeneity; and liminality, which opens a reflective space between what exists and what could emerge. These mechanisms help explain how symbolic zero operates both as a functional element within mathematical systems and as a meta-symbol that enables their critical transformation.
Symbolic zero exemplifies the entanglement of structure and creativity in human cognition. Far from a neutral sign, it mediates between embodied experience, symbolic systems, and conceptual innovation. By foregrounding the subject’s role in constructing and transforming zero, this paper invites a rethinking of mathematical universality as a historically situated, culturally enacted process.
Zero as Constructed Concept
Symbolic Operation and Embodied Grounding
Cultural Psychology and the Status of Symbolic Zero
Conclusion
Andreas Nieder, “Representing Something out of Nothing: The Dawning of Zero,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 20, no. 11 (2016): 830–842.
Benjy Barnett and Stephen M. Fleming, “Symbolic and Non-symbolic Representations of Numerical Zero in the Human Brain,” Current Biology 34, no. 16 (2024): 3804–3811.
Bertrand Russell, “Selections from Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy,” in Philosophy of Mathematics: Selected Readings, ed. P. Benacerraf and H. Putnam. Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Brian Rotman, “On the Semiotics of Zero,” in The Origin and Significance of Zero: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, ed. P. Gobets and R. L. Kuhn. Brill, 2024.
Emiko Ohnuki-Tierney, “The Power of Absence: Zero Signifiers and their Transgressions,” L’homme 34, no. 130 (1994): 59–76.
Jaan Valsiner, “Functional Reality of the Quasi-Real: Gegenstandstheorie and Cultural Psychology Today,” Culture & Psychology 20, no. 3 (2014): 285–307.
Raffaele De Luca Picione, “The Dynamic Nature of the Human Psyche and its Three Tenets: Normativity, Liminality and Resistance—Semiotic Advances in Direction of Modal Articulation Sensemaking,” Human Arenas 4, no. 2 (2021): 279–293.
Robert Kaplan, The Nothing that Is: A Natural History of Zero. Oxford University Press, 1999.