Richard Baron wrote:
As to a philosophy of math:
Here is a proposal that is philosophical and has to do with math:
The operations of mathematical symbols only reflect a valid operation in their basic relations. Once interpretation takes place, math has been removed from actual presentation (identity) of the phenomenon and thereby reflects re-presentation (equasion).
Equasion is the human interference in identity, such that what may be identical is removed from its basic state of affairs and placed in a subsequent arena of states where the affairs accord with human agenda.
The problem posed is the problem solved for any given awareness of intent. The intent is posed in the form of a question with a 'hanging equals'. The identity is denied in the effect of the human interference and interpreted as cause and effect (human pre-eminance).
How's that for some philosophy of math?
Have you been at the Postmodernism generator, by any chance? http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/
Fabulous link! I'm still chortling!
Does it ever produce statements generally accepted as valid? Or is it only an 'Emperor's New Clothes' generator, impressing no-one but the nervous-defensive?
Reminds me of the guy who (in the early eighties, IIRC) programmed his home computer to churn out haiku poems, picked the best one (in his opinion), sent it off to a Haiku competition, and won. The organisers, judges, and other competitors were outraged.
Or will some spoilsport now come along and tell me that's an urban myth?
When will the infinite-monkey thought experiment be demonstrated? Maybe the next crowd-sourced project?