Why Philosophers Should Care About Computational Complexity

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 5703
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Why Philosophers Should Care About Computational Complexity

Post by Skepdick »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 28, 2019 3:23 pm False, considering mathematics is grounded at minimum in an act of defintion, and definition requires the connection of symbols, any contradiction causes an inherent incompleteness under the premise that contradiction is a deficiency in form.
Can you think of any definition which is not a deficiency in form? You are (quite literally) reducing reality to symbols.

Abstraction is the elimination of the irrelevant and the amplification of the essential -- Robert C. Martin

"Relevance" and "essence" are contingent on human choice.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6608
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Why Philosophers Should Care About Computational Complexity

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:17 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 28, 2019 3:23 pm False, considering mathematics is grounded at minimum in an act of defintion, and definition requires the connection of symbols, any contradiction causes an inherent incompleteness under the premise that contradiction is a deficiency in form.
Can you think of any definition which is not a deficiency in form? You are (quite literally) reducing reality to symbols.

Abstraction is the elimination of the irrelevant and the amplification of the essential -- Robert C. Martin

"Relevance" and "essence" are contingent on human choice.
Fallacy of slippery slope considering whether the position of "relevance/essence" and "choice" determinines a pure assumption of which comes first and we are left with a continual alternating regress of one leading to the other to the other under a continual alternation.
R/E -> C or C -> R/E results in different definitions.

And human choice is symbolized fundamentally under a point of diverenge through the "or" function of excluded middle and/or a point of synthesis, with this choice as pure assumption of a phenomenon alone representing

The "point" exists fundamentally both as a symbol and means in itself in these respects and is grounded in the nature of assumption where all "choice" is symbolized by the separation or connection of phenomenon through a point in time with the phenomenon itself representing the point of change. In these respects the phenomenon, as assumed, is the point of awareness and exists as an element of choice through the nature of the observer him/her self.
Post Reply