barrington interview

António Pedro Marques · 10 Oct 2014, 22:42 · from 2014-October.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: entonio at gmail.com (=?utf-8?Q?Ant=C3=B3nio_Pedro_Marques?=)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 23:42:53 +0100
Subject: (urth) barrington interview
In-Reply-To: <CAJ8=rthQM-iLaak6e5KRY9WW6gU=9Uy5GOR4Fz19NqqZ87mZaA at mail.gmail.com>
References: <BLU175-W25612D593B63982B5E4F87CFA10 at phx.gbl>
	<543811EB.2010102 at clueland.com>
	<CACJ=J7mSHtrgNKZvigpxda0kU6fzA_5r4rEUHq45aDTQ-T3VXQ at mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJ8=rthQM-iLaak6e5KRY9WW6gU=9Uy5GOR4Fz19NqqZ87mZaA at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <770728D4-4AEF-47DF-B96F-668D25F93A78 at gmail.com>

Math may be derivable from logic, I don't know. I know it stared off as counting, and that is in no way independent of 'number'. But a significant number of you keep mixing up 'reality' with the tool our mind uses to process it.

No dia 10/10/2014, ?s 19:42, "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" <danldo at gmail.com> escreveu:

> Antonio, as a Catholic I simply can't accept it because I believe there is such thing as an absolute truth. Logic plays a part in this, and mathematics (which is independent of any particular notion of "number") falls directly out of logic.
> 
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Ant?nio Marques <entonio at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10 October 2014 18:05, Jeffery Wilson clueland.com <jwilson at clueland.com> wrote:
> On 10/10/2014 8:09 AM, Lee wrote:
> Gerry Quinn: All mathematics can be encoded entirely inside the standard arithmetic
> 
> of the natural numbers, or simple geometry on a plane.
> 
> 
> A nice summation of my point. Math requires numbers. Numbers describe the
> 
> universe in terms of discrete, countable units. I find it quite possible that there
> 
> are places/times in geography and history of the universe in which the concept of
> 
> numbers was meaningless.
> 
> Er, no, because the concept does not depend on the actuality. The numbers necessary for math can be entirely notional, and in fact the numbers are *always* notional and abstract. There is no place you can touch the number two, for instance.
> 
> It's not a matter of the concept not depending on the actuality. It's a matter of what you call 'concept' being how the human mind responds to actuality. Other minds might respond to the same actuality with different concepts. We've been saying this for days and folks still come back with misdirected replies. (Lee has also been making the additional point that this mind wouldn't necessarily have evolved without this actuality.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20141010/3e9f7eae/attachment.htm>

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net