4 ms·
Isn't that simply because axioms that don't lead to consistent conclusions are rejected?
by vanderZwan 7y ago
Isn't that simply because axioms that don't lead to consistent conclusions are rejected?
- danck 7y agoYou can invent and pick axioms in many ways that (probably) won't lead to inconsistencies. But they won't all be powerful enough or relevant in the real world.
- vanderZwan 7y agoWell, then it sounds like your reasoning gets it backwards: the axioms that produce systems without significant consequences or connections outside of their own abstract realm end up being ignored. Or in other words: the constraints on maths are imposed from outside of maths.
- gibspaulding 7y agoDoesn't this imply that, while you can invent all the axioms you like, you must discover which ones are consistent with each other and with experimental results.