Is mathematics just philosophy without sophistry?

Is mathematics just philosophy without sophistry?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hume's_principle
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>counting
>counting in different and complicated ways

Yeah, this has nothing to do with actual, critical thinking. "Numbers" themselves aren't even real. Either all is infinite or all things are one.

>Defense of philisophy
>It's pure sophistry
OP was right. Cue Eady as they say in math

so..... THIS... IS.... the....... power........ of....... philosophy............
woahhhhhhhhhhh.......

>"Numbers" themselves aren't even real.
This is your brain on philosophy

Calculators were invented decades ago. What's the point of math anymore? It's just intellectual masturbation. On the other hand, philosophy is a broad and still vigorous field, exploring some of the deepest thoughts humanity could imagine. They haven't invented a philosophy-calculator that can just solve philosophical problems easily. It takes human innovation and a complicated discerning of truth, not just following steps to a formula.

Mathematics is the language of quantity.

Riddle me this, is mathematics a discovery or an invention?

Have you ever done mathematics past calculus?

Uh, yes. I can even do triple integrals, fag

You've never seen a number just floating around, have you? You've seen a quantity of something, and that quantity is entirely subjective to your perception of it. This quantity can be infinitesimally divided into quarks and other subatomic particles that float in and out of existence constantly. To say that anything is ONE or TWO, is nonsense. Things are in a constant flux of being and it takes philosophy to understand this.

What, the whole mathematical field dedicated to triangles?

You invent mathematical objects and you discover their properties.

Surely we discover mathematical objects and invent their properties.

Or rather, we impose our invented properties on mathematical objects.

Pretty much, OP. Mathematics and philosophy are both entirely based on logic

>You've seen a quantity of something, and that quantity is entirely subjective to your perception of it
Quantity is one thing that isn't subjective, you retard. You can see a singe stone. You can also see two stones, side by side. No matter your opinions and perceptions of the object (disregarding madmen), you will realize the number of stones are, by definition, two; that is, twice as many as a single stone. Even if you were to divide them into their very minimal constituents, the amount of those atoms is an objective, as well.

Invention with potential to morph into discovery. There are many mathematical models that often find striking correlation with reality. For example, hyperbolic geometry was suggested as pure model long before Einstein's special relativity put euclidean geometry into question.

Define 'real'

I'm not saying there's no such thing as quantity, I'm saying the exact quantity of something is unknowable and the labels used by numbers are purely pragmatic, not real.

Mathematics is unfalsifiable nonsense.

God fucking damn it threads like this makes me hate Veeky Forums with all the power of life I have in me. If Veeky Forums was a little kid and it said something like this I would whip it with pic related and then rub my dick cheese all over its wounds. Everyone in this thread is so stupid that I am literally pulling my hair out right now. You were supposed to be the chosen ones you fucking walls, you were supposed to be the last bastion of intellectuality in this degenerate world and yet you still only post idiotic shit like this. You know what would have been a better question, one that I would have giggled and clapped at? Whether the Complete Works of Aristotle volume is better for rubbing your dick in than the Complete Works of Plato volume. Instead you post shit like this that is neither funny, nor insightful, nor respectful in any way towards our time and our lives even. Nobody will ever remember your shitty thread you fucking bottle dweller. It's as if you gave us a glimpse into death itself. FUCK.

Not exactly.
You pick the definition, or the axioms and then you find out what you get from that.
As in :
"Hey, guys, I have an idea! Let's consider some special type of linear operators that are their own adjoint!"
"Oh, I just found out they all had a spectral decomposition!"

Define a stone
>by definition
Where from is this definition?

Fuck off loser. Adults are talking.

The only mathmatis i can do is couculate how manny times i can fold my toilet paper befor this shit forom ends

I don't need to define the stone, baka, all I need to know is that it's essense is the form of 'one'
I shall leave the polemics on the stones and their stoniness to the sophists

An imageboard isn't supposed to be the vanguard of intellectualism.

>every intelligent philosopher in history, from Aristotle, Plato, Descartes, Leibniz, Kant, et cetera studied mathematics
>mathematics is the best activity to train your logic, and also the most objectively true activity humans can comprehend
>modern day literature and philosophy majors think they can be intelligent while disregarding real thinking

lmao

>its essence is the form of 'one'

In an instance, an electron flies off or a quark implodes or whatever, and you don't have the same stone you used to have now, do you? How do you explain this? How is a stone "one" when you can't even measure all the complicated structures and internal atomic mechanisms that make up the stone? Really, you're just guessing how many stones you see, and your guess is based on an imaginary "number" system, and based on your shitty perception, implying empiricism accurately details reality.

I'm studying physics and I think you're retarded. Stop with this pseudointellectual garbage. I see one stone.

>It's as if you gave us a glimpse into death itself.
Aw shit

There's a reason you're STUDYING physics now, isn't there? You still don't know everything. I'll wait until you're finished studying and have a professional degree for you to lecture me on a topic not even highly skilled and nuanced physicians have solved.

>I just learned what Lagrangian mechanics are today, so let me tell you what you can say about science
Kill yourself, incel

Only good post in this thread.

>the most objectively true activity humans can comprehend

According to who?? Your use of the word "objectively" here simplistically assigns objectivity to a practice that can only be proven by itself and by the sentimentality of those who practice it.

They take it on faith. :) the pythagorean religion lives on in strange ways

If math is unfalsifiable, then what the fuck is falsifiable then, retard?

This.

I think mathematics and physics, and philosophy are very complentary.

Taking calculus (i know its pleb tier) and doing philosophy really made me think more critically.

This is teenage anecdote

I was high on weed and i was listening to lacrisoma and contemplating the origin of the universe and i legit discovered leibnizs monadology

LMAO right that's like saying "the set of true sentences is non falsifiable nonsense"!

>I legit discovered leibnizs monadology
No, you didn't.

>physicians
I'm pretty sure medical doctors don't solve anything in the field of physics.

>autocorrect errors means I'm wrong
>being this autistic and missing the whole point

Autocorrect technology comes from the brilliant minds of mathematicians and computer programmers. Blame them.

Your perception of truth comes from a purely human framework. You place too much faith in the logic of the biology of the mind.

Internal structure intricacies do not in any way alter the fact that such structure constitutes a single macroscopical object. Take your retarded sophistry and babby tier scifi musings somewhere else, cretin.

I'm not the physics undergrad

>Autocorrect technology comes from the brilliant minds of mathematicians
Thanks

ITT people who can't solve a x2+5x-20=0 equation discussing math

>math is just counting
Somebody didn't get past algebra huh

>x2+5x-20=0
x^2+5x-20=0?

This
Why the fuck 2 didn't work

>the absolute state of this board

That's a polynomial equation for you big boy

x = 20/7?

C'mon boy this is high school mathematics

he solved it correctly, the original faggot forgot ^ between x and 2 so it's not a second grade polynom.

STEMtard detected lmao

I'm pretty sure math is just a language with logical rules.

Language has logical rules.

Sure, but language also has semantics, math doesn't.

>Past Calculus
>Triple integrals
Try some abstract algebra or analysis and see how much a calculator will help you.

i answered your question fool, maybe you're not as good at math as u think u are, read the dumb shit u wrote again

you're a fucking idiot, do you just come up with these little thoughts and think to yourself, "yea that sounds right" without the least bit of research

lol cue eady

you might be the biggest pleb on this thread. You accessig this website, be it the internet, the captcha, your shitty undeserved iphone: all these things are dependent on tons of work done by a lot of smart people in fields that would seem so foreign to you that it's easy to brush them off as abstract nonsense (not meant to be a category pun). Look into finite fields, harmonic analysis, and literally any field of research. Math is not formula, it's an investigation of the truths that these formulas are on the surface of

not just

depends on your school of thought, the math itself is consistent and can often be construed to reflect either view point. I've had grad student friends who back and forth

ouch, stfu. there's more in math than "muh tres integrals"

this is what a brainlet looks like

you suggest mathmatical objects and take years finding the correct phrasings so that those properties you want seem natural. THEN you study what goes wrong/what you can't fix, because it's probably indicitave of a greater underlying structure

??????? I forgot seeing the axiom of choice in any non math literatures

right point. Put it this way: when you look at three things your brain doesn't have to count; it becomes a unit of "three." This will work up until about 5, from which point you break down 6 into two groups of 3 or whatever. There's a very perilous sort of connection with numbers and our intuitions of counting. And on the other side you will give numbers properties in order to sort of penetrate better ambient spaces for the numbers to work in.

eg. R is a lot more useful in the calculuses than Q because of the completeness while C arises when you pretty much figure out a way to multiply/divide two dimensional vectors over R

I'll bite and give a few defs:
a dedekind cut (so an above bounded set who's suprenum/zorn union) comes out to that number on the "edge"

or, equivalently, the completion of Q, so a real number is anything you can approximate with rational numbers

well

somewhat reasonable sentiment

eh, some linear alg. Bad example though: spectral decomposition is sort of a perfect case scenario, and the proof sort of makes that (somewhat) obvious if you have the patience (and not being condescending here, the proof of SD is fucking tedious) to get through it

well what is the shape of a stone???

I'm pretty sure you're a mouth breather

lol a calculator has helped me when working out Jordan canonicals/rational decomposition but I'm just being an ass at this point

>Yeah, this has nothing to do with actual, critical thinking.

t. Libfarts Gag

Sure, we have it easier today to explain mathematical axioms to children but to get to the point was not easy and you demonstrable ignorace on the matter is highly amusing.

you get that a lot of all the quiet autistic intellectuals attract each other in specific places. I'm not even joking, sure there are a lot of fucktards who troll. But a lot of the people that come here will end up in a high place of society. And in a few decades you'll hear a lot of millionaires, politicians, and scientist mention that they wasted a lot of their time at places like this.

No. Mathematics is sophistry, philosophy leads to actual wisdom.

Did everyone in this thread conviently forget that mathematics are responsible for almost all the technological advancements in the last few centuries?

I can see this work OP, but sophistry is also present in mathematics. I can see both fields as tools and as a form of data storage. Both fields solving problems, mostly not interferring with eachother.
But their language and approach are different.

Utilitarianism isn't a convincing argument outside of Reddit.

He described pragmatism, not utilitarianism.

Irrational numbers and different types of infinity is pretty sophist

About technological advancements?

Both. Mathematics is a series of invented abstractions that explain the natural world.

Yes.

Sounds like utilitarianism to me.

Ok, I think you're confused though.

(P1) We ought to have ontological commitment to all and only the entities that are indispensable to our best scientific theories.

(P2) Mathematical entities are indispensable to our best scientific theories.

(C) We ought to have ontological commitment to mathematical entities.

Yes i did.

Math BTFO

I dunno about that. Most philosophy is pretty informal.

If you're only reading continentals, maybe

no

no of course it fucking isn't

jesus fuck this board is full of morons

I'm a philosophy major and you're retarded.

so are you.

>philosophy major
All it tells me is that you're rich and stupid.
Any major that isn't STEM or economics is a literal waste of time

>a single macroscopic object

Yeah, according to subjective human perception. A grain of sand isn't a stone because we're too large to consider it a stone. A planet isn't a stone because we're too small to consider it a stone. The "stone" here is nothing more than what society agrees it is. There is no "objectivity" involved in assigning numbers to things. To claim to know how much of a stone there is at any given time is totally irrational.

What great universal truth does math impart on us?

>muh logic

I think half the time, it's just intentionally trying to sound convoluted just to get more attention paid to it. At it's core, it's about quantity, not the human condition, history, how societies should organize themselves, or anything meaningful.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hume's_principle

Get ready to drop out because you seem immune to critical thinking about reality and completely ignorant of the nominal and irrational theory of numbers.

Riddle me this, is the wad of toilet paper you use to wipe your ass a discovery or an invention?

>tfw mathlet
Is there a good book for someone who majored in CS but never studied math beyond calculus? I just want a general overview of mathematics without too much unnecessary autism (yes, I understand that unnecessary autism basically defines math)

Give me a hint. Does it depend on the kind of poop that came out of your anus?

that geometry is fun

No philosophy deals with the human experience, math deals with numbers. I don't see how they are similar.

Wow these posts are sad and childish

Skimmed through the thread, bad thread, couldn't find a good post

Math isn't only arithmetic.

mathematics is ecology without the sentimentality

Prove the riemann hypothesis with your calculator and win 1 million dollars then.

you can't prove it with a calculator because calculators weren't invented when riemann was alive

what

Princeton Companion to Mathematics. The first part gives a good overview of the main "basic" concepts all mathematicians know. The rest of the book is also interesting to flip through but may require more technical knowledge.

The king of shitposting right here, boys. It's so easy to trigger Veeky Forums.

Thank you, senpai, it looks interesting. Is there a similar volume that connects math and concepts of physics?

whom

Is this anime over 18?