On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 1:55 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:

>  On 9/21/2012 8:59 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sep 21, 2012, at 8:13 AM, Rex Allen <rexallen31...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>  On Sep 18, 2012, at 9:19 PM, Rex Allen <rexallen31...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Terren Suydam 
>> <terren.suy...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Rex,
>>>
>>> Do you have a non-platonist explanation for the "discovery" of the
>>> Mandelbrot set and the infinite complexity therein?
>>
>>
>>  I find fictionalism to be the most plausible view of mathematics, with
>> all that implies for the Mandelbrot set.
>>
>>  But ;et me turn the question around on you, if I can:
>>
>>  Do you have an explanation for how we "discover" mathematical objects
>> and otherwise interact with the Platonic realm?
>>
>>
>>  We study and create theories about objects in the mathematical realm
>> just as we study and create theories about objects in the physical realm.
>>
>
>  So in the physical realm, we start from our senses - what we see, hear,
> feel, etc.
>
>  From this, we infer the existence of electrons and wavefunctions and
> strings and whatnot.  Or some of us do.  Others take a more instrumental
> view of scientific theories.
>
>
>  Right, and we have similarly inferred the existence of primes, fractals,
> non-computable functions, etc.
>
>
> We invented counting, addition, etc and found it implied true propositions
> about primes, fractals, etc.  To say they exist in the same way tables and
> chairs exist is going much further.
>

All of our scientific theories are inventions too.  We can only hope they
bear some resemblance to reality.


>
>
>
>
>  So you're saying that "thought" is another kind of sense?
>
>
>  Thought is needed for inference and building theories, equally in the
> physical sciences and math.
>
>   And that what occurs to us in thought can also be used as a basis to
> infer the existence of objects which help "explain" those thoughts?
>
>
>  Right, like you might think up genesis and dualism, or big bang and
> materialism, or platonic truth and computationalism.  These are ontological
> theories for what exists, and why we are here experiencing it.
>
>  If you say math is fiction and only exists only as a story in our
> brains, then obviously you can't use platonic truth and computationalism as
> one if your theories of existence.
>
>  I think the fact that mathematics can serve as a theory for our
> existence shows absolutely that mathematical theories and physical theories
> are on equal footing.  We can gather evidence for them and build cases for
> them, find out we were wrong about them, and so on.  Why do we believe in
> quarks, electrons, strings, etc.?  Because they can explain our
> observations.  Why do I believe in the platonic realm?  For the same
> reasons.
>
>
>  But we believe that electrons interact causally with us because we are
> made from similar stuff - and by doing so make themselves known to
> us...right?
>
>  How do Platonic objects interact causally with us?  Via a Platonic
> Field?  PFT - Platonic Field Theory?
>
>
>  How did the warping of space and time cause Einsteins brain to figure
> out relativity?
>
>  I think you are looking at it in the wrong way.  Our brains seek good
> explanations.  They sometimes find one.  That's all that is going on.
>
>  Now you say our explainations when it comes to mathematics are fiction,
> but if that is so, why not say the same of the physical theories?  Why not
> say the big bang is fiction, or matter is fiction?
>
>
> They are stories which we intend to have referents independent of the
> stories (theories).
>
>
I don't see how this is any different from our mathematical theories though.

Jason

-- 
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 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to