Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No more than if any non-humans recognize what we describe as green, or sugar, or a flower. They're all labels which more or less successfully describe something. That another non-human animal can identify things in the real world seems to be a separate question from the labels we ourselves put them - unless those non-humans have independently created the exact same labels.
It isn't as if we generally teach all of the math which doesn't work for any useful purpose
Numbers are the territory when we're doing mathematics. But that territory is not real, it is invented.
Hydrogen has 1 and exactly 1 proton in its nucleus. This was true long before there were any humans. But there were no 1's present at that time. Just hydrogen atoms.
First questions: Am I part of reality?
Are interactions part of reality?
Really? So it just happened that birds invented the same numbers?
And question for you: was 6 + 7 = 13 true before human beings existed? When did it become true?
You are real.
I'm not sure what you mean by interactions.
Physical interactions. You've suggested hydrogen as an example, so the forces between the proton and the electron would be an interaction.
Physical forces/interactions are real.
No. "I", "part", "interaction" are labels (which describe the way we structure reality).Yes, you've said that several times now. Repeating it doesn't make it more convincing. In fact, I've not disagreed with this statement.
So I guess we'll have to slow down and take smaller steps.
First questions: Am I part of reality? Are interactions part of reality?
Even more puzzling: What is "the" and what is "and"?I used algebra as an analogy during a recent discussion, and was told the situations I was comparing were "apples and oranges". See here:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7877904-25/#post67475629
Given my poor, addled, foolish Christian brain, I don't understand all I should about higher mathematics. So, I don't understand how fruit and the arithmetic mentioned in the video were supposed to be an answer regarding my analogy about algebra.
So let's start with this: Can someone please define "2" for me. Thanks. This is really a puzzler.
Why? Why isn't "force" just a label - a construct of the human mind?
And math is arguably a cognitive *tool* to help us understand how the world around us functions. Yes/no ?Some labels name real things, like "bowling ball"
Some labels name non-real things, like "unicorn"
The problem with numbers is not that they are labels, but that they have no real referent.
If we accept the axioms of Sherlockiana, it is a true statement that Sherlock Holmes lived at 221B Baker Street. This does not make Sherlock Holmes real. Mathematics is a similar kind of fictional enterprise about invented characters called numbers.
Sigh. "force" is a label, quite explicitly with the quotes. The interaction between the proton and electron is real. I can, in a way, point to it.
If we stipulate there were no minds back then, then no minds could have thought it at that time. The statement could not have been instantiated or supported in any minds, since there weren't any. But that doesn't, I think, prevent it from being true at that time, if we're talking about the standard axioms of arithmetic. In a particular axiomatic system, the meanings and relations are fixed, and there is no reference to time or space in them. Peano didn't say "0 is assumed to be the first natural number, but only after 1500 AD." Unlike a rock or a sock, the concept of 0 doesn't have any time or place attached to it. It's not so much that I can imagine a 0 on the moon or in the Jurassic. But that 0 is nowhere and nowhen, because it is an abstract invented idea. In ordinary arithmetic, 6 + 7 = 13. It can't be otherwise.
In the system defined by ordinary arithmetic, what does 6 +7 equal...
when you're in a moving bus? It doesn't matter, in that system, it can't help but be 13.
if you're in Belgium? It doesn't matter, in that system, it can't help but be 13.
What if the 6 is on a moving bus, and the 7 is in Belgium? 6's and 7's can't be anywhere, but in that system, that sum must be 13.
What if the 6 is in the Jurassic and the 7 is in next week? 6's and 7's can't be in some particular time, but in that system, that sum must be 13.
The problem with numbers is not that they are labels, but that they have no real referent.
If we accept the axioms of Sherlockiana, it is a true statement that Sherlock Holmes lived at 221B Baker Street. This does not make Sherlock Holmes real. Mathematics is a similar kind of fictional enterprise about invented characters called numbers.
I couldn't agree more. Numbers are part of reality, not merely a human construct.
Actually, you can't. What you can point to are particles moving. It is only in your mind that you lasso together those things and label them forces.
And math is arguably a cognitive *tool* to help us understand how the world around us functions. Yes/no ?
It is a cognitive tool to help us describe the world around us.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?