I think it has been said several times :
The existence of a number/arithmetical proposition is the fact that its
existence/truth does not depend on the fact that you exist/that it exists
conscious beings capable of thinking of it.
So the truth value of a proposition is independant of
1Z wrote:
Not even remotely. I fact, what I have said can be written as two valid
syllogisms.
Existence is availability for causal interaction
Numbers are not available for causal interaction
Numbers do not exist
Platonism is the claim that numbers exist
Numbers do not exist
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 17-août-06, à 00:14, complexitystudies a écrit :
I recall it is just the belief that the
propositions of elementary arithmetic are independent of you. Do you
sincerley belief that 37 could be a non prime number? Or that the
square root of 2 can equal to a ratio
Hi Bruno,
Again we are discussing the arithmetical realism (which I just assume).
A bold assumption, if I may say so.
To be clear on that hypothesis, I do indeed find plausible that the
number six is perfect, even in the case the branes would not have
collide, no big bang, no physical
Hello to the List :-)
The deductions made via UDA are impressing,
but I would like to seriously question the Platonic
Assumptions underlying all this reasoning.
Arguments like the perfectness of 6 seem sensible at
first sight, but only because we look at this with human
eyes.
1) Mathematical
5 matches
Mail list logo
