On Friday, October 19, 2012 3:29:39 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 17 Oct 2012, at 17:04, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 10:16:52 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 16 Oct 2012, at 18:56, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> Two men and two women live together. The woman has a child. 2+2=5 >> >> >> You mean two men + two women + a baby = five persons. >> >> You need the arithmetical 2+2=4, and 4+1 = 5, in your "argument". >> >> Bruno >> >> > I only see that one person plus another person can eventually equal three > or more people. > > > With the operation of sexual reproduction, not by the operation of > addition. >
Only if you consider the 2+2=5 to be a complex special case and 2+2=4 to be a simple general rule. It could just as easily be flipped. I can say 2+2=4 by the operation of reflexive neurology, and 2+2=5 is an operation of multiplication. It depends on what level of description you privilege by over-signifying and the consequence that has on the other levels which are under-signified. To me, the Bruno view is near-sighted when it comes to physics (only sees numbers, substance is disqualified) and far-sighted when it comes to numbers (does not question the autonomy of numbers). What is it that can tell one number from another? What knows that + is different from * and how? Why doesn't arithmetic truth need a meta-arithmetic machine to allow it to function (to generate the ontology of 'function' in the first place)? It's all sense. It has to be sense. > > > > It depends when you start counting and how long it takes you to finish. > > > It depends on what we are talking about. Person with sex is not numbers > with addition. > > You are just changing definition, not invalidating a proof (the proof that > 2+2=4, in arithmetic). > I'm not trying to invalidate the proof within one context of sense, I'm pointing out that it isn't that simple. There are other contexts of sense which reduce differently. Craig > > Bruno > > > > > Craig > > >> >> >> >> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ >> >> >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/QjkYW9tKq6EJ. > To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> > . > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > > > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/ma4il48CDGAJ. 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.
