At 09:20 AM 4/28/2015, Frederik Stjernfelt wrote:
HP: Or are [logic and math] conditions for describing laws?
Indeed they are, but more than that. Parts of mathematics which are
not (yet?) applied in any science are unproblematically developed.
So I would not subscribe to Quine's idea that it is utility in
physics which is the only validity test for math
HP: How do you test their validity?
We will have to ask mathematicians. Internal consistency, fit with
other parts of mathematics, things like that.
[snip]
But that is probably not the last word on that issue.
HP: Thank you for the clear answers. Since I totally agree, this is
my last word (until I again get confused by these intricate discussions)
Howard.
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
