You apply the thoughts onto the physical world i.e. typing, measuring, hammering, drilling, and driving ... etc. You have ideas how to use and manipulate the physical objects. But the ideas are in your head, not in the world. — Corvus

Ideas are in the head, but ideas can change the world.

If ideas in the brain exist as part of the physical structure of the brain, then this would explain how an idea can change the physical world.

In the same way that an idea physically exists within the brain, numbers, being ideas, would also only exist within the brain in physical form.

Ideas are in the head, but ideas can change the world. — RussellA

I had an idea to cut down the tree in the back garden for 10 years, but it was just an idea. The tree is still standing tall. Can ideas themselves change the world?

In the same way that an idea physically exists within the brain, numbers, being ideas, would also only exist within the brain in physical form. — RussellA

Where about in the brain do you see numbers existing in physical form?

Where about in the brain do you see numbers existing in physical form? — Corvus

P1 - Numbers and colours exist somewhere otherwise we couldn't be discussing them.
P2 - We know that numbers and colours exist in the mind because we are aware of them.
P3 - We observe the colour red even though colours don't exist in the world. What exists in the world is the wavelength 700nm. We mentally project the colour red onto the world that we are observing.

C1 - Similarly, it is possible that even though we observe numbers in the world, numbers need not exist in the world, as we can mentally project numbers onto the world.
C2 - As it is possible that numbers need not exist in the world, there need be no metaphysical angst about numbers existing in the world.

P4 - A calculator can manipulate numbers within the physical structure of the calculator in a deterministic and explainable way.

C3 - There needs be no metaphysical angst about numbers existing in a calculator.

P5 - Similarly, there is no reason why the brain cannot manipulate numbers within the physical structure of the brain in a deterministic and explainable way.

C4 - Similarly, there needs be no metaphysical angst about numbers existing in the mind.
C5 - Any metaphysical angst about numbers is unnecessary.

P1 - Numbers and colours exist somewhere otherwise we couldn't be discussing them. — RussellA

The fact that we are discussing something is not the evidence for existence of something. We can discuss about the unicorn or a flying pig. Does it mean the unicorn or flying pig exist?

"Numbers and colours exist somewhere"? Somewhere is like saying nowhere.
No one would know where the somewhere is. In which country, and which city, an what street, at which number of the property does it exist? It has to be a specific location that can be verified by possibility of visiting the site in person in giving out the location of the existence to be meaningful.

I could go on pointing out the logical problems in your list, but I will just stop at the first one (to save time).

The fact that we are discussing something is not the evidence for existence of something. We can discuss about the unicorn or a flying pig. Does it mean the unicorn or flying pig exist? — Corvus

They exist in literature and in the mind as thoughts.

If either the unicorn or flying pig didn't exist somewhere, then you couldn't have written your post.
===============================================================================

"Numbers and colours exist somewhere"? Somewhere is like saying nowhere. — Corvus

The expression "exists somewhere" does not mean "exists nowhere".

If either the unicorn or flying pig didn't exist somewhere, then you couldn't have written your post. — RussellA

I know them in my thoughts, and that's how I could write about them. I knew them as non-existence ideas, but they don't prevent me from writing about them. They don't exist. They are known as ideas.

The expression "exists somewhere" does not mean "exists nowhere". — RussellA

It means it doesn't mean anywhere. In other words, it is a meaningless assertion.

Right, i'm following

3 doesn't make sense on its own, but 3 kings do, 4 apples do as well.
It took me 2 days to read the book. 2 itself is meaningless, but 2 days makes sense. — Corvus

The word "three" doesn't make sense alone. What does? That is, what does make sense alone? Is anything alone as a word without action or a place that is to be made sense of? A concept is what alone? Just that...waiting to be grabbed? Meaningless? There for grabbing, always? There for making meaning? Should we, take it how it is? Use it as it is? Understand it as it is? And also be correct...some times? As it is, is meaningless to whom? One outcome still always exists/did/will. One outcome ought to exist... ? It is not a question of ought, it is, does, will, has already. Two things at once?

The answer: three. That is leaving three alone, and it makes sense to some while maybe not everyone. Like if you didnt know the question, but see that the answer to question five is, three. You would see.....
Q#5 - three or perhaps Question five: 3. Where would three alone exist anyways?

The concept of three, requires other things to be understood like counting, math, geometry, etc not all or one or the other...any one or all. With one, comes all and with three, comes 1 and 2....

Three as a concept, so be it for the hell or heaven of this discussion is of/in the world existing in Mind and/or material, either/or it does not matter for this sake, as they both can be/are counted and considered real or to exist.

I have three ideas,
I have three apples.
Let's repeat those three ideas,
let's juggle those three apples.

Who does it matter to if it does or does not? Who is asking? If the asker is needing an answer of surety, the self holds the answer/s already, JUST not yet aware where to look to find. It is not time, yet. Chance may not exist at all, time may be taken instead of used....enjoy it at the very least :party:


"3"/"Three" doesn't make sense alone, does "third"? Third and three are different how? Numbers are words? Numbers of names, like William Earl the third, William Earl lll, meaning three generations of Willy Earl exist...Generational suffixes make me wonder about: Numbers vs words...order? The concept includes what was taught/learned of order, 3 days and 3 apples are counted in three's but what makes three days and three chairs are of two different kinds.

Concept of time and order, and using language skills to name things with numbers, three chairs...three days. A day is a thing but not like the other thing. A concept vs tangible item, of material.....A concept of mind vs an object of mind, the way we describe them with words and different languages is of intelligent brains using minds to make experiences in life better fit, learning for next time...a lesson in time.

I wonder, if/is the word or concept known of "3"/three, one but not the other? [2] I'm thinking to myself: What are other one worded concepts? three is a concept, one word, aka alone, three chairs alone is not alone, its of three things. Three is never alone, perhaps. Three is a concept, then? Or numbers are what make the concept three possible to clearly count therefore grasp/see/understand?

We can put three rocks in the basket, whether we know what the concept of numbering or without knowing how to count. Knowing that this many things fit in this size basket, call it something other than three, three chairs and three days can be broken down, three is the name of the group, three is the concept of numbers in groups. Forming a concept from one to three, one idea, one chair, two idea, two chair....three!

Me thinking aloud and typing thoughts as it comes: "Space occupying vs material objects vs space occupying in mental/mind as materials that are known to exist, imagined, counted in head, space not required to fill....?"


Three is company!!

The more added to one word, the sense is still never assured out of it. Words alone, numbers alone do make sense but with context, awareness, and a clear view of its place (and YOURS) in/FROM the moving world.

Why you, Art48 or anyone at that, happens to even make sense or "see" three for what it is, as it is, alone...is interesting enough to someone. I am more interested in if what you see is to be verified? When,why if it must? To be labeled, confirmed, or not? Aware or not? True or not? From what exactly, is up in the air yet, reach!!!! stretch!!! almost gotcha!!! From a Right or wrong? Good or bad? EVIL? Yes or no?

We may see only you, seeing me...
outside looking in, an observer makes



12/17/24
801 pm holding off to post...above is raw, first draft/version
1013pm addition [1]
1030pm addition [2]


[1] I came to find Friedrich Nietzsche's, "Genealogy of Morals" of relevance to this comment and without looking. I found a youtube video after typing in the search bar on my ruko tv, "genealogy documentary," as I was looking for family tree types of stories, something about ancient blood lines and going about/ over how family lines have been traced and tracked. THEN a recommended video caught my eye, and I clicked. Found on Eternalised's YT channel, a 10 min video called "Genealogy of Morals | Friedrich Nietzsche" So, I have it playing in the backround as I am re-reading my comment above, not including the new additions 1, 2, the original draft finished at 801pm...and from what I took in and overheard, I intuitively drew connections, ( i am not fully saying I am on board with the work, I am just seeing connecions at this early point in my research ) , from both my comments and the video summary of the essay. I notice that topics of mutual interest resonated between thinkers. The essay touches on, Good bad evil, guilty conscious (bad conscious), morality and suffering as all are topics that I have mentioned in my last few contributions...no need to refer or point out specifics, it's all here and there. :monkey: I just so happened to learn about the essay AFTER these thoughts shared above came and were typed stream of consciousness style. Haven't even read it yet, though, I LOVE to see it



Yes!

We mentally project the colour red onto the world that we are observing. — RussellA

I am still confused about this specific topic or debated ongoing discussion... Colors we project mentally are compatible to what exists in nature it seems, we know or assume others are projecting that color as well...animals, plants included living things adapting to environment and survival instincts have developed with time. Vision is an important sense that humans/animals have. The living beings have built in, wit a purpose and function is to take place using the senses combined with the formation of the body that is adapted to the surroundings, environment or habitat that makes sense....

Combined the brain, body, and senses to the earth, location is relevant and it all can make sense when put together..ex eye sockets, eyeballs, bone shape of face are features we are born with (given we have no complications or disables or deformities) Our bodies assume we ought to see our surroundings, we project color to help us communicate what we see around us to our brains, informing and updating with each glance, each blink...each dream...we dont need color to see and survive, color blind people are navigating life just as fine, but the color is being read or projected in mind, but because the brain has developed to recognize / organize the environment to a point where it comes naturally to see color from wavelengths in this stage of evolution.

The fluid colors we "project" or see using our eyes, vision, and senses proper to the surroundings/material/light in scope of vision, presented before our eyes I thought was because of the range in the cones and rods, our photoreceptors sensitivity to light? The wavelengths we pick up according to external world around us, that we live in and take in (thru all senses available to us) being color coordinated mentally and not actually existing is just hard for me to understand, let alone believe so BLINDLY.

Where did that range come from? How do we know what will help the brain organize using our eye balls and reflexes/instinct/ability and how do we figure, that to see the color is helping the brain organize, what if it is for imprinting better memories from more vivid life experiences? The wavelength as it is shown to us in the world, use light to get to our eyes and our brain just instantly paints the picture live in front of us each time? I think its more of a stored quality, muscle memory if you will...instinct or maybe just a natural intelligence that comes with the brain/body working together in day to day life over time...

What is shown to us (in the world, in our heads) vs as it is? Specific experiences maybe are relevant to occur over/in time? TIME and perceptions....perhaps experience with perception...Awareness of that? AS that topic is still debatable, see thread on perception, the discussion is ongoing from many stances and starts, that was bound to go somewhere. How it crashes and burned is telling, but the end is not NO WHERE. It awaits a fellow traveler.

The direction is not welcoming or to be followed, though. Perhaps a dead end after all. Then, a U-turn is required. A choice. Take the next best exit, go that way....It is a complex area to discuss as both scientific and philosophical understandings about human nature come into play, at times that make nothing easy. Nothing good comes easy...

Easy goes it, life. So it seems. Humans are in it and under the scope....behind them as well...experiments, and observers....What else? A third party we forgot? In nature, plants/animals and with conscious beings in nature, humans-- are two different concepts, or experiences ...though they make sense together. We ought to be compatible.

Now were talkin

C5 - Any metaphysical angst about numbers is unnecessary. — RussellA

Agreed to this point..But wondering, what do numbers have to do with the concept of order? levels or ranks?