IGNORANCE OF MATHEMATICAL PHILOSOPHY – CONTINUED I’ve been working my way throug

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/naturalism-mathematics/LESS IGNORANCE OF MATHEMATICAL PHILOSOPHY – CONTINUED

I’ve been working my way through this reading list and it turns out that plenty of people have written on the subject, but it’s not clear that they understand the underlying problem of correspondence (even if they use the term ‘external authority’). And the best author in the space is incorrect, and the matter apparently isnt settled.

So, now it’s off to articulate the solution to this particular problem, even in mathematics. That will sort of anchor the legitimacy of my argument in favor of operational language in all disciplines.

Sigh.

Roman is pushing me to publish and not to spend time outside of Politics and Ethics. But my instinct tells me that my argument (calculation) seems to invite the solution to unifying the ‘logics’ and, as I’d hoped, eliminating platonism as well as obscurantism.

If in fact, the innovations that I’m adding to political ethics are largely in the realm of requiring calculability and operational language, then it would seem to me that I should also ground operational language and calculability.