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 [email protected] 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
