Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Wolf Kirchmeir (wwolfkir_at_sympatico.ca)
Date: 03/20/05
- Next message: Morituri-|-Max: "Re: Lab fireball 'may be black hole'"
- Previous message: Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud: "Re: SORRY ! Something went wrong."
- In reply to: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 16:24:00 -0500
Albert Wagner wrote:
> Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
>
>> Albert Wagner wrote:
>>
>>> robert j. kolker wrote:
>>>
>>>>> You should really learn the definition of metaphysics, Bob.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Metaphysics is the philosophy of being qua being. It is about what
>>>> is real and what is not.
>>>
>>>
>>> So how do you account for this contradiction:
>>>
>>> "Mathematics is not metaphysical. It makes no claims to reality or
>>> the nature of reality."
>>
>>
>> What contradiction?
>>
>> Oh, I see, you believe that mathematics is about reality. That's your
>> definition, I guess. That's all right, Albert, I don't mind.
>
>
> You're a fucking idiot, Wolf. But it wouldn't be so obvious is you
> actually read for comprehension. Bob doesn't see a contradiction
> either, in that it was he who said:
>
> "Mathematics is not metaphysical. It makes no claims to reality or the
> nature of reality."
>
> Followed shortly by:
>
> "Metaphysics is the philosophy of being qua being. It is about what is
> real and what is not."
Yeah, I've "read for comprehension", as you so quaintly put it, and
there is no contradiction. Whether what mathematics is about is real or
not is not a mathematical question. Whether mathematics implies the
reality of the entities whereof it speaks is not a mathematical
question. If you think otherwise, go ahead. I don't mind. Whatever pulls
your chain.
Of course, if you do think that mathematics asserts that circles,
infinite sets, etc are real, I can understand your annoyance at people
who talk about these things as if it made perfect sense to do so. I can
understand it, but I can't share your pain. Sorry about that.
Whether mathmetiacl objects are real in some sense is an interesting
question, and I've read differing points of view about it. I can't say
that I've been convinced by any of them. But that doesn't affect the
pleasure I get from doing mathematics, in the limited way my talents and
skills permit.
- Next message: Morituri-|-Max: "Re: Lab fireball 'may be black hole'"
- Previous message: Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud: "Re: SORRY ! Something went wrong."
- In reply to: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]