God and Mathematics

[Tenuisvir]

Just a quick question that I could use some clarification on.

Is Scientists reliance on mathematics equal to Religions reliance on God(s)?

 

[Chany]

Just a quick question that I could use some clarification on.

Is Scientists reliance on mathematics equal to Religions reliance on God(s)?

Do you think Buddhism is a religion?

 

[grasping the after wind]

Just a quick question that I could use some clarification on.

Is Scientists reliance on mathematics equal to Religions reliance on God(s)?

No, but there are some interesting correlations between Math and Religion having to do with blind faith in a non physical reality.

 

[keith99]

Just a quick question that I could use some clarification on.

Is Scientists reliance on mathematics equal to Religions reliance on God(s)?

No.

It is like Scriptures reliance on existing language.

Mathematics is the language of science.

 

[grasping the after wind]

No.

It is like Scriptures reliance on existing language.

Mathematics is the language of science.

That's a somewhat flawed analogy as science, including mathematics, requires the same spoken language that religion does in order to ever have existed at all. Without our ability to communicate concepts through abstractions none of them would be possible. Sometimes people are persuaded that the abstractions are the reality because we rely on them more to shape our worldview than we do the actual physical world that exists independent of and prior to our abstractions of it.

 

[Resha Caner]

Do you think Buddhism is a religion?

A good question, and basically a request for definition.

FYI, people may want to check out the work of Harty Field: Science without Numbers.

 

[Usus Vox Tractus]

"Hear oh Israel, the Lord thy God, the Lord is one."

Whole/Holiness

God is the first whole integer, by which all others are measured.


And there is a difference between an omni-relative ONE, and a mono-relative one.

An Omni-relative ONE would be like an ocean of water with no top of bottom or sides. A mono-relative one would be like a single droplet of rain.

 

[VProud]

We did not make mathematics up.
It's something we observe. A natural language.

1+1=2
e^2=m^2c^4+p^2c^2
The square of the hypotenuses of a right angle triangle is equal to the sum of the square of the remaining two sides.

These are all testable, confirm-able.

That said, the idea of a God could probably play into that fairly well. Some may say that the idea of 'numbers' must have a 'first' instance, something to compare them with. Some may call that God.

It really depends on how 'real' you think a number is.

 

[Usus Vox Tractus]

We did not make mathematics up.
It's something we observe. A natural language.

1+1=2
e^2=m^2c^4+p^2c^2
The square of the hypotenuses of a right angle triangle is equal to the sum of the square of the remaining two sides.

These are all testable, confirm-able.

That said, the idea of a God could probably play into that fairly well. Some may say that the idea of 'numbers' must have a 'first' instance, something to compare them with. Some may call that God.

It really depends on how 'real' you think a number is.

What is a "number". A place holder? Thinking of singular things...a single apple comes from a tree that produces multiple apples. When was the first apple? Or are we at a snapshot in time in a species drift?

Perhaps there is no "apple", there is only the ever-branching expressions of fruiting bodies.


I suppose one could count the tree as singular, but it depends on the earth and the sun, not to mention countless other microbiota in the soils.

Is the earth a "one"? Well yes and no, the life support function of our planet is mostly driven by it's parent star although there has been a bounty of life found on the floor of the ocean where the only energy source is geothermal vents.

Is our solar system "one"? Kinda. Who knows if the sun would be stable enough on it's own to support life without being a part of the gravitational and electromagnetic dance of the entire galaxy.

Individual galaxies dance around nodes to become parts of super clusters, filaments and sheet walls. Everything upwards in scale from then on is a cloudy, spongy mass of condensing matter within expanding space... We are at the upper limits of material science, and the universe keeps on going.



"It takes the creation of an entire universe to bake a single apple pie." Carl Sagan.


It seems that the existence of any one manifest thing is dependent on the Entirety.

 

[Usus Vox Tractus]

Here's a thought: When counting 0,1,2,3,4,5....etc....where does the 1 come from?

It seems to me that the leap from 0 to 1 is immeasurable greater than 1 to 2.

When I add 1 to 1 to get 2, the 1 already exists to use. But when I start with zero....the 1 does not exist to add! Where does "1" come from?

=)

 

[jayem]

Here's a thought: When counting 0,1,2,3,4,5....etc....where does the 1 come from?

It seems to me that the leap from 0 to 1 is immeasurable greater than 1 to 2.

When I add 1 to 1 to get 2, the 1 already exists to use. But when I start with zero....the 1 does not exist to add! Where does "1" come from?

=)

As was stated, mathematics is a language. Which we use specifically to describe measurements and quantities, and understand their relationships. Numbers are the symbols of this language. Zero symbolizes the state where no quantity exists. 1 symbolizes that a quantity does exist. If another quantity is added to it, then there are 2. If there is yet another, then we have 3. And so on. These quantities can be anything we want. Or they can be simply the idea of a quantity. It's just a useful mental construct.

 

[Usus Vox Tractus]

As was stated, mathematics is a language. Which we use specifically to describe measurements and quantities, and understand their relationships. Numbers are the symbols of this language. Zero symbolizes the state where no quantity exists. 1 symbolizes that a quantity does exist. If another quantity is added to it, then there are 2. If there is yet another, then we have 3. And so on. These quantities can be anything we want. Or they can be simply the idea of a quantity. It's just a useful mental construct.

I understand, but what was the first "1"? How does a quantity of anything arise from a quantity of nothing?

Nothing in nature appears linearly, how does any one thing appear without all that came before and beside it?

In the colors of the rainbow, which color is number 1 in sequence of arising?

This isn't a rhetorical question, I really do have a solution in mind.

 

[jayem]

I understand, but what was the first "1"? How does a quantity of anything arise from a quantity of nothing?

Nothing in nature appears linearly, how does any one thing appear without all that came before and beside it?

In the colors of the rainbow, which color is number 1 in sequence of arising?

This isn't a rhetorical question, I really do have a solution in mind.

That's an ontologic issue, not one of mathematics. It's an interesting discussion, but it should be a new thread.

 

[KCfromNC]

Just a quick question that I could use some clarification on.

Is Scientists reliance on mathematics equal to Religions reliance on God(s)?

No. Various types of math are just convenient man-made shorthand for communicating specific scientific ideas.

Religions use gods as a source of presumed authority for the whims of their leaders. The closest comparison [still not great, though] would perhaps be science's reliance on testing their ideas against the empirical evidence.

 

[Usus Vox Tractus]

Here's an interesting confluence. Pythagoras - Greek Mathematics - The Story of Mathematics

The over-riding dictum of Pythagoras's school was “All is number” or “God is number”, and the Pythagoreans effectively practised a kind of numerology or number-worship, and considered each number to have its own character and meaning. For example, the number one was the generator of all numbers; two represented opinion; three, harmony; four, justice; five, marriage; six, creation; seven, the seven planets or “wandering stars”; etc. Odd numbers were thought of as female and even numbers as male

 

[Received]

Just a quick question that I could use some clarification on.

Is Scientists reliance on mathematics equal to Religions reliance on God(s)?

Never thought of it that way. In a sense, numbers are the perfect example of axiomatic stuff, which because you can't prove means you have faith in their validity. Somehow secular things fail to qualify as faith if the thing you can't prove works over and over again. There's no reason why theology couldn't work in a similar way.

 

[KCfromNC]

Never thought of it that way. In a sense, numbers are the perfect example of axiomatic stuff, which because you can't prove means you have faith in their validity.

I'm not sure what validity of numbers means in this context. Seems like a weird concept to try and apply to what is basically just a mutually agreed upon identifier - almost like saying that people have faith that the word dog is valid.

Somehow secular things fail to qualify as faith if the thing you can't prove works over and over again.

Yep, having evidence removes the need to believe something without evidence.

There's no reason why theology couldn't work in a similar way.

It would have to stop talking about unobservable, unprovable entities though. Would it still be theology if you removed gods from the picture?

 

[Received]

KCfromNC, would it hurt your feelings if I said you have faith in secular presuppositions and axioms like a religious fundamentalist has faith in his deity?

 

[variant]

KCfromNC, would it hurt your feelings if I said you have faith in secular presuppositions and axioms like a religious fundamentalist has faith in his deity?

It would be your standard equivocation of the term faith.

Standard axioms are not believed in without the possibility of evidence like deities.

Just a quick question that I could use some clarification on.

Is Scientists reliance on mathematics equal to Religions reliance on God(s)?

No.

Mathematics are testable, descriptive and explanatory. Gods are none of these, so they aren't equal.

 

[Received]

http://www.christianforums.com/t7826362-24/