If math doesn't exist in some kind of Platonic realm and is all in the head as it were, we have a problem: — TheMadFool
Plato was also a dualist I gather. The material world we live now is a shadow of the true world of Idea. — Corvus
But you would no longer be seeing an image of what we are saying, but rather the truth itself, at least as it looks to me. Whether it really is so or not can no longer be properly insisted on. (533a)
This sounds like Kant.the way in which his mind organizes the world according to kinds. — Fooloso4
Would it be because the mind cannot see itself? Reason cannot reason reason itself. :)There is, however, no methodological transition from dialectic to knowledge of the Forms. (Republic 511b). — Fooloso4
:100: :up:One problem is just when one is supposed to have gained such knowledge, in which past life, and how was it possible then?
The Forms are said to be what sensible things are images of, but they are themselves images, what Socrates imagines knowledge must be: — Fooloso4
If math doesn't exist in some kind of Platonic realm and is all in the head as it were, we have a problem:
— TheMadFool
But the whereabout of Platonic realm is not conclusive is it? It does not preclude possibility of its locus in the human mind, does it? — Corvus
No it does not but if math is invented, Platonic realm missing, then we have a major issue because of the circularity I mentioned earlier which I will reiterate for those interested: — TheMadFool
Math -> Physics -> Chemistry -> Biology -> Mind (Brain) -> ?
Legend: The mind supervenes on biology, biology on chemistry, chemistry on physics, physics on math.
The ? = Math if math is invented. That would close the loop as it were and we have on our hands a rather vexing circularity: Everything we know, including the mind as per physicalists, is math but math, if Platonism is false, is mind (it's in our head). So, everything is mind then or everything is math. It's quite confusing. — TheMadFool
No, we are not saying everything is mind. We are saying that the math knowledge and ability is in mind, and we apply it to the real world objects. — Corvus
We're not talking about knowledge and ability. What we're concerned with is the reality of math. Is it discovered, in which case Platonism would be true, or is it invented, Platonism false? The reat of my argument follows from that. — TheMadFool
The knowledge and ability were mentioned, because you said that everything is mind. Just to say that, everything is not mind. Never said that we were talking about knowledge and ability. — Corvus
We're not talking about knowledge and ability. What we're concerned with is the reality of math. Is it discovered, in which case Platonism would be true, or is it invented, Platonism false? The reat of my argument follows from that. — TheMadFool
There is, however, no methodological transition from dialectic to knowledge of the Forms. (Republic 511b).
— Fooloso4
Would it be because the mind cannot see itself? Reason cannot reason reason itself. — Corvus
dopey Tegmark conjectures — Prishon
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.