Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Alamo-Girl; TXnMA
Another example: geometric form, e.g. circles, exist and the geometer merely comes along and discovers it.

This would be the view of the mathematical Platonist (e.g., Einstein, Tegmark), in contradistinction to the view of the mathematical Formalist (e.g., Hilbert, Russell).

If I had to describe the principal difference between these two foundational mathematical "philosophies": Mathematical Platonism assumes the nature of universal reality is "given," and explores it on such terms. Mathematical Formalism assumes there is nothing "given"; that man creates the reality he explores as he goes along, via abstract methods.

Which usually don't work. See: Hilbert's attempt to reduce mathematical language to its syntactical elements only, in the attempt to remove all semantical elements by reducing them to syntactical structures.

To put it another way, both Hilbert and the great Bertrand Russell found axiomatic expressions perfect examples of "circular reasoning" — detestable impredicativities that could not be expressed at all in "yes/no," "true/false," "0/1" mathematical language. In Hilbert's formalism, they needed to find a way of expression in purely syntactical terms.

But then Kurt Gödel showed up, and demonstrated the sheer logical impossibility of trying to remove semantics by re-expressing them in terms of syntax only.

[Syntax refers to the rules of the road (so to speak) of any given language, preeminently including the universal language of mathematics; semantics carries meaning in any given language, the successful communication of which is highly dependent on there being agreed-upon "rules-of-the-road."]

It seems to me Platonists take the "long view" of the universe: They see it as something they are born into and depart from, in due course. It is what it is before they got here; and will be the same after they depart. In short, they recognize themselves as parts and participants in a vast cosmic enterprise.

On the other hand, for the Formalists, it seems the universe didn't begin until the day they were born, and will be extinguished on the day that they die. They don't consider themselves as "parts and participants" of it, but as the very lawgivers that determine and run it, via their sui-generis "creative" acts....

Looks to me like the birthplace of a Second Reality.... FWIW.

Thank you so very much for writing, dearest sister in Christ!

167 posted on 12/15/2012 11:59:04 AM PST by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies ]


To: betty boop
It seems to me Platonists take the "long view" of the universe: They see it as something they are born into and depart from, in due course. It is what it is before they got here; and will be the same after they depart. In short, they recognize themselves as parts and participants in a vast cosmic enterprise.

On the other hand, for the Formalists, it seems the universe didn't begin until the day they were born, and will be extinguished on the day that they die. They don't consider themselves as "parts and participants" of it, but as the very lawgivers that determine and run it, via their sui-generis "creative" acts....

I couldn't agree with you more, dearest sister in Christ!

Looks to me like the birthplace of a Second Reality.... FWIW.

And I believe you just hit the nail on the head. The popularity of second realities may likely have sprung from man's desire to be his own "god."

168 posted on 12/15/2012 8:33:29 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson