4 ms·

> Does it matter that two bricks are not "the same piece of matter" if our predictions work the same for both of them No, because of a dense, interconnected we

> Does it matter that two bricks are not "the same piece of matter" if our predictions work the same for both of them No, because of a dense, interconnected web of other social truths (the rest of the arithmetic model), the relative error of this one truth/model is negligible. However, confusing your model for reality is a fallacy perhaps older than time.

bheadmaster 4y ago
I don't understand how is "the arithmetic model" a social truth, when it clearly corresponds to physical phenomena. You can make a skyscraper that doesn't fall, and it exists regardless of whether other people see it or not. You see it - it's there. What is "social" about that? > However, confusing your model for reality is a fallacy perhaps older than time. I think that the human perception the world is a robust enough model to be equated with reality without issues. If you go down the path of denying perception, you might as well go full solipsism, in which case it doesn't even make sense to discuss reality at all.
- guipsp 4y ago
  We have a model of physics which is pretty accurate. The engineers who designed the skyscraper did not even use this model, they used a much simpler one, with known errors. Why? It is simply good enough™. But you can't claim it is even "true" when we know more accurate methods.
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    My claim is not that the model itself is true - I'm claiming that the underlying mechanisms that rule the world are true and are not subject to change by social consensus. The model is "good enough" for the purpose of creating a building, but that doesn't make the act of "creating a building" any less real, nor the underlying rules that govern matter any less true. Our descriptions are not real - the rules themselves (which we may not know exactly) are real. Therefore, mathematics - the set of rules that corresponds to how reality works - itself exists in reality regardless of social consensus. Society can't change them by making a different consensus.
    - guipsp 4y ago
      Nothing about mathematics describes how the world works.
- broast 4y ago
  As far as rejecting perceptions i think going straight to solipsism is a big jump. We may live in a reality that we have no access to. Donald Hoffman's theories in this area are fun.

bheadmaster 4y ago

I don't understand how is "the arithmetic model" a social truth, when it clearly corresponds to physical phenomena. You can make a skyscraper that doesn't fall, and it exists regardless of whether other people see it or not. You see it - it's there. What is "social" about that? > However, confusing your model for reality is a fallacy perhaps older than time. I think that the human perception the world is a robust enough model to be equated with reality without issues. If you go down the path of denying perception, you might as well go full solipsism, in which case it doesn't even make sense to discuss reality at all.

guipsp 4y ago
We have a model of physics which is pretty accurate. The engineers who designed the skyscraper did not even use this model, they used a much simpler one, with known errors. Why? It is simply good enough™. But you can't claim it is even "true" when we know more accurate methods.
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  My claim is not that the model itself is true - I'm claiming that the underlying mechanisms that rule the world are true and are not subject to change by social consensus. The model is "good enough" for the purpose of creating a building, but that doesn't make the act of "creating a building" any less real, nor the underlying rules that govern matter any less true. Our descriptions are not real - the rules themselves (which we may not know exactly) are real. Therefore, mathematics - the set of rules that corresponds to how reality works - itself exists in reality regardless of social consensus. Society can't change them by making a different consensus.
  - guipsp 4y ago
    Nothing about mathematics describes how the world works.
broast 4y ago
As far as rejecting perceptions i think going straight to solipsism is a big jump. We may live in a reality that we have no access to. Donald Hoffman's theories in this area are fun.