Re: Existence of mathematical entities (Re: Successor Axiom: on what grounds TF?)

From: Mitch Harris (harrisq_at_tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de)
Date: 02/28/05 

Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 16:44:44 +0100

examachine@gmail.com wrote:
> Mitch Harris wrote:
>>examachine@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>Nothing exists until you have empirical evidence for it.
>>
>>Or rewritten to make your context more apparent:
>>
>> "You don't know anything exists until you have empirical evidence
>>for it"
>>
>>So what would be empirical evidence for "There exists an even prime."?
>>(maybe I need more clarificatoin of what you mean by "empirical").
>
> This is quite simple.
>
> You need nothing more than computational evidence, e.g. facts about a
> simulation in your head, of a *generative* system of numbers.

OK. That, to me, is a reasonable interpretation of "empirical" (though
I'd suppose non-standard).

> The willingness of realist-logicists to taint empiricism with Platonist
> notions does not stand in the way of a truly positivist philosophy.

Oh. 

-- 
Mitch Harris
(remove q to reply)

Relevant Pages