4 ms·
I'm sure there is some interesting and valid material here, but the overall project of doing philosophy via mathematics is nonsense. As a sidenote, you acutall
by javert 13y ago
I'm sure there is some interesting and valid material here, but the overall project of doing philosophy via mathematics is nonsense.
As a sidenote, you acutally need philosophy to validate mathematics, not the other way around.
- Schiphol 13y agoYou should probably read more of what these theorists call mathematical philosophy (I recommend reading a couple of numbers of Erkenntnis, edited by Leitgeb, and perhaps taking this course) before passing such a harsh judgement. As a sidenote, the kind of foundationalism about mathematics that you seem to endorse is not the only option in the philosophy of mathematics -- although this issue is largely orthogonal to the prospects of mathematical philosophy.
- brg 13y agoI disagree. There is an asymmetric relationship between philosophy and mathematics that belies the lack of influence and low import of the former. Science, mathematics, and even art can all continue at no diminished pace without input from philosophy's sophists.
- chris_wot 13y agoAs a sidenote, you acutally need philosophy to validate mathematics, not the other way around. Forgive my ignorance, but why is that?
- thebooktocome 13y agoIt was philosophy that saved the world from (classical) infinitesimals, and spurred the development of modern analysis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Analyst http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Analyst (No, classical infinitesimals bear no resemblance to the infinitesimals of nonstandard analysis.)