On 3/15/07, David Nyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Mar 14, 10:18 pm, "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps using the term "existence" for mathematical objects is
> misleading.
> > It doesn't mean they exist as separate objects in the real world,  just
> that
> > they exist as concepts. This is mathematical Platonism.
>
> Yes, I understand.  I guess I'm saying that nevertheless I can
> conceive of a radical negation in which even Platonic objects have no
> existence, conceptual or otherwise. Consequently AFAICS arguments for
> Platonic 'necessity' are in fact derived wholly from contingent states
> of affairs.
>

It's something Bruno, in particular, has discussed at length. Is it possible
that 17 is only contingently prime?

Stathis Papaiaonnou

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to