Re: Mathematics greatest ontological blunder
- From: "Charlie-Boo" <shymathguy@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 24 Jun 2006 16:27:05 -0700
John Jones wrote:
The common numerals (1,2,3, etc) are used in mathematics. However, the
working assumption of mathematicians that unemployed numerals
naturally, mysteriously even, fall in line behind those numerals that
have already been mathematically employed
No they don't. Incompleteness means some never fall in line.
C-B
must rank as one of
mathematics greatest philosophical blunders. For example, we speak of
the 'even numbers' and list them 2,4, 6, ... . Here, (...) is the
assumption that unemployed numerals naturally fall into line as even
numbers. The fact that this error occurs early on in the ontology of
mathematics, prior to its extensive symbolism, ensures that the error
goes virtually unnoticed.
.
- References:
- Mathematics greatest ontological blunder
- From: John Jones
- Mathematics greatest ontological blunder
- Prev by Date: Re: the "Robotic Mule".........incredible Robotic achievement
- Next by Date: Re: A definition of 'two' (2) please?
- Previous by thread: Re: Mathematics greatest ontological blunder
- Next by thread: 4. Land mammal-whale transition
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
