Yes, reforming philosophy, or more specifically, the unification of the sciences (disciplines) is what we’re working on. Given that the structure (first principle) of the universe and the structure (first principle) of language (Grammar), is the same, it’s possible to unify the sciences. At which point philosophy proper would remain as the study of preference and choice and be fully demarcated from science as the study of decidability.
Reply addressees: @matterasmachine @Plinz
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-30 14:53:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1818298959246319616
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1818279818485448782
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH MATH?
1) A great deal is wrong with math in the sense that the externalities produced by the framework of of its evolution are vast and negatively consequential.
2) Yes. You are correct that matter is discrete (operational, computational) and physics is continuous (statistical, calculative), and the failure of this comprehension has led to founding mathematics on sets instead of operations.
3) In economics we are painfully aware of the limits of mathematics and we account for those limits even if most economists use the wrong calculus in their calculations. In physics they are more likely to use the correct calculus but not understand the limits of mathematics. In mathematics all to often they use platonic forms and create and export nonsense ideas to justify what would be perfectly rational if explained operationally (for example the square of negative one).
So the claim from mathematicians that ‘it works and we don’t want to reform’ is the same reason philosophy died by the 1970s.
CD
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1818279818485448782
Leave a Reply