On Monday, December 10, 2018, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On 12/9/2018 6:42 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 2:53 PM Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > >> They are fundamental only in the sense that one can use them as axioms. >> So their fundamentalism is circular. >> >> Brent >> >> On 12/9/2018 7:36 AM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> But I think truth plays an even more fundamental roll than this. e.g. >> because the following statement is *true* "two has a successor" then >> there exists a successor to 2 distinct from any previous number. >> Similarly, the *truth* of "9 is not prime" implies the existence of a >> factor of 9 besides 1 and 9. >> >> >> > That position was defensible before Godel, but not after. He showed > mathematical truth cannot be based on axioms. > > > But he didn't show it could be based on something else. > > > We're talking about primary substances/foundations of reality. Those things, that by their definition of being primary objects, are not based on anything else. That neither he, nor anyone else showed mathematical truth is or can be based on something else would be expected if it is a primary object. Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
