4 ms·
because numbers have a natural meaning. roughly speaking each integer has as many meanings as its value. so 0 and 1 are just the very beginning. zero's natural
by narinxas 3y ago
because numbers have a natural meaning. roughly speaking each integer has as many meanings as its value. so 0 and 1 are just the very beginning.
zero's natural meaning is special, it's the void. sometimes the 'variable' stands in as having this meaning, sometimes the variable is zero.
one is the easiest simplest to grasp. its meaning is "I", ego.
two is duality in the broadest imaginable sense. wars are being fought right now over the precise meaning of 3
- ajhurliman 3y agoThis feels closer to a tarot reading than mathematics, and I’m here for it
- _0ffh 3y agoThe Tao Produced One; The One Produced Two; The Two Produced Three And The Three Produced All Things.
- Shorel 3y agoSounds very close to the firstness, secondness and thirdness categories from Charles Sanders Peirce. (Which I think are nothing but nonsense from a madman =)
- User23 3y agoHe was an awfully pragmatic madman. He also discovered the universal and existential quantifiers independently of Frege, albeit a few years later. No offense intended, but to the extent his work feels mad to you, it might be a “you problem.” That said, he never did reduce firstness, secondness, and thirdness to unity to his own satisfaction either. His work is truly tantalizing. Oh and abduction has had some conceptual influence too. Sad that the Arisbe fansite got deleted.
- Shorel 3y agoI agree this must be a "me" problem. I just have never found these three "universal" categories useful for anything whatsoever except for a semiotics class in university where he was one of the study subjects. Umberto Eco on the other hand... every single thing he wrote was immediately interesting and useful. Or funny. His Lolita's parody, Granita, was Pratchett and Adams levels of funny. He was awesome.
- narinxas 3y agowe can be more precise now: the three produced the equation, which pretended that all things were (could be) equalized into equivalence. they called this algebra and parised some monotheistic god; they called this magic and GOTO one.
- smegsicle 3y agothats funny i always heard it was an origin with two other orthogonal roles unless youre a dirty filioquist
- mjrpes 3y agoPerhaps 0 and 1 are the same. If there only exists the entity called 1, lacking all properties or relations to other entities, what is left? A void called 1, no different than 0. The true mystery is: how did plurality arise?
- eru 3y ago> Perhaps 0 and 1 are the same. Compare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_with_one_element https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_with_one_element
- User23 3y agoConsider for a moment that Aristotle, and thus most likely all the ancients, made a distinction between nothing and void.