Well, I'm relieved to learn that i'm not old enough to be your father. But my sceptical brain doesn't accept absolutes. I consider logic a human invention. We'll just have to disagree. Paul -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > You may be old enough to be my father (my mother is in her > 80s ... ;-) but what you are saying here is simply incorrect. > > Assigning symbolic values to things is not mathematics. It is a basic > capability of the human brain also expressed in language and does not > depend upon logic. Mathematics depends upon logic. > > Godfrey > > > On Oct 27, 2006, at 11:35 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Of course mathematics is based on observation. It's a method of > > assigning values to our environment that we perceive as logical. > > The truth of mathematics is only provable, because the logic is > > itself based on observation. When the first cavement decided to > > count the trees in his yard, he was assigning values to things he > > observed. He created a logic of his own. It's not intrinsic, > > although it may seem so now. However, this kind of discussion is > > pointless. it all depends on whether or not one believes that > > humans are capable of observing the universe as it truly exists. I > > accept the logic of science as a convenience, but I leave room for > > doubt. > > Paul > > Who, unfortunately, is not a laddie and is probably old enough to > > be your father:-) > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Whoa laddie! Mathematics is not a code, and it is not based on > >> observation. Observations of the world might inspire a Mathematical > >> concept which wonts for proof, but do not factor into the proof > >> itself. > >> > >> Mathematics is the study of provable truth using logic, which > >> provides a structure for science (the aggregation of predictive > >> knowledge through hypothesis and observation) to work with, not the > >> reverse. Mathematics also provides a structure for the development of > >> codes. > >> > >> What I think you are mistaking here is the expression of Mathematical > >> constructs. This is a language or possibly several languages, not a > >> code. > >> > >> Godfrey > >> > >> PS: > >> ... > >> PMDL == Pentax Mathematics Discussion List > >> PPDL == Pentax Pun Discussion List > >> ... > >> > >> On Oct 27, 2006, at 5:01 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > >> > >>> ... I'm frequently amused by the scientists and secular > >>> humanists who describe what they think they see using a code they > >>> call > >>> mathematics. Of course since that code is based on what they have > >>> observed it fits this little circular universe perfectly. This of > >>> course proves to the weak minded that what they observe is indeed > >>> real. > >>> Doubt is the precursor to real knowledge. Arrogance is self > >>> defeating. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> [email protected] > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
