"math is just a language we use to describe things. It is not fundamental."
That's certainly one of the poles of the "is math real" philosophical debate - but it's a debate, and a lively one. I fall firmly on the "math is real" end of the spectrum. — Charles On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 15:19, <silkl...@bobf.frankston.com> wrote: > As Nuñez and Lakoff wrote in Where Mathematics Comes From - Wikipedia > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_Mathematics_Comes_From> math is just > a language we use to describe things. I tis not fundamental. And science is > about a tentative understanding (or faith) that is contextual and not > absolute. The challenge is escaping the reductionistic assumption that > understanding the parts gives you an understanding of the whole when the > closer you look at the less meaning there is – as in seeing bits in > isolation tells you nothing about their contextual meaning. And, to me, the > scientific method is simple, oops, I’ll try again and not formulaic as they > attempted to teach me in high school. Falsifiability is a useful heuristic > but not fundamental. > > > > I wrote https://rmf.vc/IEEEAgeOfSoftware for those interested in a deeper > dive. > > > > > > *From:* Silklist <silklist-bounces+silklist= > bobf.frankston....@lists.digeratus.in> *On Behalf Of *Tim Bray via > Silklist > *Sent:* Sunday, January 14, 2024 21:02 > *To:* Charles Haynes <charles.hay...@gmail.com> > *Cc:* Tim Bray <tb...@textuality.com>; Intelligent conversation < > silklist@lists.digeratus.in> > *Subject:* Re: [Silk] A religion for atheists > > > > I remember I was giving a lecture on how TLS web security worked and I > pointed out “there’s no science here, it’s about corners of math like > number theory that everyone thought were useless wanking until recently”. > Which is to say, my notion of “faith” is something like “inexplicable by > the scientific method”, which in practice means “not based on falsifiable > hypotheses”. Math is useful but doesn’t do that and also doesn’t claim to > necessarily correspond to reality as we experience it. As far as I know, > science’s only axiom is the inductive principle, i.e. that the universe is > consistent and thus you can generalize from the specific. > > > > On Jan 14, 2024 at 5:54:36 PM, Charles Haynes <charles.hay...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Ah, ok. How much of the theoretical foundations of math are you familiar > with? The 9 axioms of ZFC are the things that underly math that no one can > prove. Sort of by definition. Which is one way if getting around the > "faith" argument in math. Those axioms are "definitional" if you like > rather than "taken on faith" but whatever you call them they're things > everyone who uses math accepts as true - but can't possibly prove. > > > > BTW formal Buddhism is pretty empirical. The Dalai Lama has famously said > (paraphrasing) "if science can show reincarnation is not true, we must > abandon it." On the other hand Buddhism as practiced is full of > superstition (as I'm sure you well know.) > > > > Anyway, I like to use ZFC to examine how anti-faith supposed rationalists > are. I find the philosophy of science fascinating. > > > > On Mon, 15 Jan 2024, 1:51 pm Tim Bray, <tb...@textuality.com> wrote: > > On Jan 14, 2024 at 3:56:01 PM, Charles Haynes <charles.hay...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > In that piece you seem to be conflating "Faith" and "Religion." Do you > think that faith always implies religion? I personally define faith as > "things I believe that are true but that I can't prove" and it seems to me > that doesn't particularly imply religion - unless you define religion so > broadly that it becomes the same as faith. > > > > Haha, I believe in lots of things I don’t understand let alone can prove, > for example how airplanes fly and how electrical infrastructure works. I > think I was writing about the large class of things that people believe > that *nobody* can provide an evidence-based proof for. Which I think is > mostly religion? Or if you prefer, the “supernatural”. > > > > > >
-- Silklist mailing list Silklist@lists.digeratus.in https://mailman.panix.com/listinfo.cgi/silklist
