What Bothers A Philosopher of Maths?

What Bothers A Philosopher of Maths?
Throughout the time span of (roughly) 9 years I have been in contact
with dozens of scholars. The culture of the world of pure academics
of the Ivy League towers has a notorious reputation. Not long ago (as
of a few months ago) I came upon a comment of a YouTube comment
on a video on mathematics (forgive me for I am unable to remember the
first video that I came upon) by Sylvain Poirier.
I was very impressed that I had found a like minded scholar so I decided to
contact him. I would like to refer all of my readers to his
website /http://settheory.net. I do think that there are many scholars
(and students) whom would find settheory.net to be helpful (useful
and interesting). I ask the question can
mathematics brake or be broken?
I would like to write about one particular paragraph from one specific
article online “A Beginner’s Guide to Forcing” by Timothy Chow.
One sentence in a particular paragraph stood out to me. Chow
quoted Fields medalist Paul Cohen.
      
In “A Beginner's Guide to Forcing” Timothy Chow stated that
Paul Cohen “... even if standard models exist, one might think that
constructing a model of ZFC satisfying ¬CH might require considering
“exotic” models in which the binary relation R bears very little
resemblance to ordinary set membership. Cohen himself admits on
page 108 of [6] that a minor leap of faith is involved…”
“Faith” is a word that makes all mathematicians and scientists very
uncomfortable. We are expected to blindly accept a premise. There
have been times when there has not been a clear answer in the
sciences. I think there are mechanics to describe everything in
the universe (the tangible and intangible e.g. matter, antimatter,
feelings, axioms, etc.). I am not afraid to state that I do not know
how fine grain space-time can be quantized. Just because I (or a
real expert) does not have an answer does not mean that there are
no answers. I think there is an answer if one looks to a
system that is incomplete.
I would like to state that I am going to create (perhaps) multiple
posts on the matter of mysticism. The flaws of dogmatic theism
are likely obvious. I can safely assume that most scholars are
familiar with the flaws of spirituality too. Perhaps it would be
beneficial to dive into reasons as to why spirituality is dangerous for
science. Sciences and the contents of theological studies must not be
mixed. I would be interested to explore the question that I have been
chasing my entire life- Are there any unexplained phenomena that
scientists could benefit from to use to solve REALLY DEEP
matters? I think there might be. I am confident that
human beings do not fully understand certain concepts. Just
as scientists (in some way) hope that there is
no ‘God’- this
would make reality very unusual for
scholars. Ordinary people
hope that the being that they pray to is
real for more obvious reasons.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Competence

      On Competence In the past I have heard one proclaim that modern society is based off of some hierarchy of competence. The proposed idea seems straightforward and quite intuitive. In this post, I would like to contest the conjecture. Albeit I think that, perhaps there may be some validity to the proposition. I would like to make the proclamation that I am not opposed to the idea and think that competence mixed with ‘healthy’ competition is a positive thing. When anyone is given an equal opportunity to display his/her competence then a society shall be worthwhile and have something of value to a finite planet.   I would like to state that as foolish as theism is I deem so called ‘scholars’ such as Jordan Peterson as apart of (what has been coined) the “Intellectual Dark Web” in a new movement that has been spreading. One point (of many) that is brought up by this ‘friend’ that the Nazis were so successful due to the swift and eff...
Read more

A Response to Tom Bartlett’s “Has Consciousness Lost Its Mind?”

        A Response to Tom Bartlett’s “Has Consciousness Lost Its Mind?” On June 6, 2018 Thomas Bartlett wrote an article for The Chronicle cleverly and ironically titled “Has Consciousness Lost Its Mind?” the expanded title is a bit more extensive (and does not really roll off the tongue) “ What would Noam Chomsky, Deepak Chopra, a very friendly robot, plus a bevy of scientists, mystics, and wannabe scholars do at a fancy resort in Arizona? Perhaps real harm to the field of consciousness studies, for one thing. ” The article is an attempt to showcase the absurd, circus-like show of a conference that pretends to be serious. The Conference held in Tucson, Arizona biannually, The Science of Consciousness is spreading misinformation thanks to a bunch of ammatuer scholars, many of whom have their own theories for contending theories for some all encompassing ‘theory of everything’. These amateurs are deluded that they shall, one ...
Read more

New Intellectualism

     It used to be the case that outside of the world of academia there was seldom serious work done in realms such as physics, biology, chemistry, and mathematics.For a large majority of time, realms such as mathematics and physics have been reserved and exclusively been explored by professional scientists. Through the past several decades it seems as though there have been many others (whom are, at times involved in other professional affairs) that have decided to pursue their hobbies. In part, due to the age of the internet and other technologies, information is widely accessible.     Problems such as the "measurement problem", "the mind-body problem" and the "hard problem of consciousness" (Chalmers, 1995) are no longer issues that can only be worked on by professional scholars. The above mentioned allows for a professional academic's worst nightmare- crackpots. Unfortunately, the past several decades have given rise to both pseudo-intellectuali...
Read more