> On 14 Dec 2018, at 19:41, Philip Thrift <cloudver...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 9:16:58 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Mathematics is immaterial, but it makes no sense to say it is fiction, unless > deciding that Aristotle is true and Plato is wrong, but I would need some > evidences for this, which are literally never given. > > Bruno > > > > "Mathematics is immaterial" is a conclusion or an assumption. If it is an > assumption, then one can proceed within that context. > > If it is a conclusion, then what is the basis of that conclusion?
It is a fact. You don’t need to assume any principle of physics to do math. > > Fiction can be considered to be material. ? > If all the traces of Sherlock Holmes stories were taken out by the sun > exploding (the books, movies, TV show recordings, the brains with SH > memories), there would be no more Sherlock Holmes (unless a SH story were > sent on one of those human-made objects leaving the solar system [ > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_objects_leaving_the_Solar_System > ]). ? (Level confusion). > > But suppose that "mathematics is material”. What could that even mean? > That (I claim) is a better claim to support than "mathematics is immaterial". > > I don't get the "1+1=2" proof that math is immaterial. You don’t need to prove that mathematics is immaterial. You need only to see that no physical assumption is used in mathematical theories. It is a factual fact about mathematics. > The immaterialist already presumes that math is immaterial, so "1+1=2" is the > case in some immaterial (Platonic) realm (they claim), Mathematics is not philosophy. No need to assume a Platonic realm. You assume only things like A->(B->A), or x + 0 = x, etc. > so therefor math is immaterial. Sounds like circular reasoning. ? > The materialist sees "1+1=2" as something that applies when he (when he was a > caveman) put a rock next to another rock. And so on. No problem with this. That does not make 1 into a material object, even if 1 apple could be. > > One type of objection might be that matter is a mystery, but math isn't. But > I think complexity theorists (like Chaitin) have shown that math is a mystery > too. ? > > So mathematics and matter are both mysteries (but that matter is primary is > the best way to go, given everything). > > I agree with Galen Strawson at this point: The one thing that isn't a mystery > is consciousness. I cannot make sense on any of this. Sorry. Bruno > > > - pt > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
