Author: Curt Doolittle

No that is not the point of the intuitionistic movement. The intuitionistic movement is better thought of as a reaction to the re-platonization of math and physics in physics exemplified by the einstein bohr problem.

–“In the philosophy of mathematics, intuitionism, or neointuitionism (opposed to preintuitionism), is an approach where mathematics is considered to be purely the result of the constructive mental activity of humans rather than the discovery of fundamental principles claimed to exist in an objective reality.

The fundamental distinguishing characteristic of intuitionism is its interpretation of what it means for a mathematical statement to be true. In Brouwer’s original intuitionism, the truth of a mathematical statement is a subjective claim: a mathematical statement corresponds to a mental construction, and a mathematician can assert the truth of a statement only by verifying the validity of that construction by intuition.”–

The meaning of this is rather important because it describes a large part of why physicists are failing to advance the discipline – they treat mathematical references as real rather than imagining a model and trying to determine if it is possible to express mathematically.

Math is just another language. Like all languages it follows the universal grammar of continuous recursive disambiguation. However, it is the simplest (dumbest) possible grammar, because it has only one noun (number, where are all numbers are functions), very few verbs (operations, all of which are functions) and very few agreements (tests), and therefore is context and scale independent, and as such a non-conflationary, non-inflationary (mostly) system of logic (language).

Reply addressees: @LiminalRev @RussellJohnston @Zamicol @cryptogeni