Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

Theism a Better Explanation for Mathematics?

TrueScotsman
Posts: 515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 2:40:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Hey everyone,

Just wanted to start a discussion on this topic, of whether or not Theism is the better explanation for Mathematics.

It is apparent that mathematical abstract concepts, can be used to predict the existence of certain things in the physical universe, as can be attested through theoretical physics.

What are you thoughts on the matter?

Here are a couple good starting points:
1) Do you embrace realism or anti-realism?
2) Does the existence of mathematics promote issues for atheism, and thus support theism in your opinion.

Just share your thoughts, and please be respectful!

Best Regards,
TrueScotsman
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 2:51:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 2:40:50 PM, TrueScotsman wrote:
Hey everyone,

Just wanted to start a discussion on this topic, of whether or not Theism is the better explanation for Mathematics.

It is apparent that mathematical abstract concepts, can be used to predict the existence of certain things in the physical universe, as can be attested through theoretical physics.

What are you thoughts on the matter?

Here are a couple good starting points:
1) Do you embrace realism or anti-realism?
2) Does the existence of mathematics promote issues for atheism, and thus support theism in your opinion.

Just share your thoughts, and please be respectful!

Best Regards,
TrueScotsman

I don't particularly see the relevance of mathematics to theism or atheism. Perhaps if one adheres to platonic realism but I do not see how such a position is sustainable.

Even accepting the Kantian notion that we have innate a priori knowledge of the concept of numbers I don't see how that entails theism or atheism.

It is true that mathematics has application in describing things that exist within the universe, however I have yet to see mathematics deal with the notion of existence itself. The notion of existence simply escapes description within scientific and mathematical contexts - which I suspect is because we are simply epistemologically limited.

Heidegger's notion of existence for example pretty much concedes the notion that we cannot describe existence conceptually and thus ties it to consciousness, the "present-at-handness".

If we cannot describe existence conceptually, then we cannot describe existence mathematically, and thus give up a priori notions of fully understanding it. PCP did a good post on this in the philosophy forum a couple months back with similar themes (mostly attacking scientism).

Thus this has negative implications for theism, because it seriously damages the notion of knowing God's existence a priori.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 5:25:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 2:51:11 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/12/2015 2:40:50 PM, TrueScotsman wrote:
Hey everyone,

Just wanted to start a discussion on this topic, of whether or not Theism is the better explanation for Mathematics.

It is apparent that mathematical abstract concepts, can be used to predict the existence of certain things in the physical universe, as can be attested through theoretical physics.

What are you thoughts on the matter?

Here are a couple good starting points:
1) Do you embrace realism or anti-realism?
2) Does the existence of mathematics promote issues for atheism, and thus support theism in your opinion.

Just share your thoughts, and please be respectful!

Best Regards,
TrueScotsman

I don't particularly see the relevance of mathematics to theism or atheism. Perhaps if one adheres to platonic realism but I do not see how such a position is sustainable.

Even accepting the Kantian notion that we have innate a priori knowledge of the concept of numbers I don't see how that entails theism or atheism.

It is true that mathematics has application in describing things that exist within the universe, however I have yet to see mathematics deal with the notion of existence itself. The notion of existence simply escapes description within scientific and mathematical contexts - which I suspect is because we are simply epistemologically limited.

Heidegger's notion of existence for example pretty much concedes the notion that we cannot describe existence conceptually and thus ties it to consciousness, the "present-at-handness".

If we cannot describe existence conceptually, then we cannot describe existence mathematically, and thus give up a priori notions of fully understanding it. PCP did a good post on this in the philosophy forum a couple months back with similar themes (mostly attacking scientism).

Thus this has negative implications for theism, because it seriously damages the notion of knowing God's existence a priori.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

You said there is no mathematical notation for consciousness or existence. Are these 2 things known a priori? We also don't have math to describe pain, happiness, love.

The number sense a priori knowledge I always thought was just simple counting numbers usually under 10.

Math is just like Science. They are man made tools to describe reality. Good evidence points to both being incomplete or inaccurate.
TrueScotsman
Posts: 515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 5:56:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 2:51:11 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/12/2015 2:40:50 PM, TrueScotsman wrote:
Hey everyone,

Just wanted to start a discussion on this topic, of whether or not Theism is the better explanation for Mathematics.

It is apparent that mathematical abstract concepts, can be used to predict the existence of certain things in the physical universe, as can be attested through theoretical physics.

What are you thoughts on the matter?

Here are a couple good starting points:
1) Do you embrace realism or anti-realism?
2) Does the existence of mathematics promote issues for atheism, and thus support theism in your opinion.

Just share your thoughts, and please be respectful!

Best Regards,
TrueScotsman

I don't particularly see the relevance of mathematics to theism or atheism. Perhaps if one adheres to platonic realism but I do not see how such a position is sustainable.

Even accepting the Kantian notion that we have innate a priori knowledge of the concept of numbers I don't see how that entails theism or atheism.

It is true that mathematics has application in describing things that exist within the universe, however I have yet to see mathematics deal with the notion of existence itself. The notion of existence simply escapes description within scientific and mathematical contexts - which I suspect is because we are simply epistemologically limited.

Heidegger's notion of existence for example pretty much concedes the notion that we cannot describe existence conceptually and thus ties it to consciousness, the "present-at-handness".

If we cannot describe existence conceptually, then we cannot describe existence mathematically, and thus give up a priori notions of fully understanding it. PCP did a good post on this in the philosophy forum a couple months back with similar themes (mostly attacking scientism).

Thus this has negative implications for theism, because it seriously damages the notion of knowing God's existence a priori.

Perhaps it might be good to respond with a question, so I can better understand your position.

Do you think the applicability of mathematics to the natural world has any implications whether for atheism or theism?

Also,
How do you as a Nihilist view the applicability of mathematics to the natural world, is it just a mystery or convenience?
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 6:00:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 5:25:37 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 1/12/2015 2:51:11 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/12/2015 2:40:50 PM, TrueScotsman wrote:
Hey everyone,

Just wanted to start a discussion on this topic, of whether or not Theism is the better explanation for Mathematics.

It is apparent that mathematical abstract concepts, can be used to predict the existence of certain things in the physical universe, as can be attested through theoretical physics.

What are you thoughts on the matter?

Here are a couple good starting points:
1) Do you embrace realism or anti-realism?
2) Does the existence of mathematics promote issues for atheism, and thus support theism in your opinion.

Just share your thoughts, and please be respectful!

Best Regards,
TrueScotsman

I don't particularly see the relevance of mathematics to theism or atheism. Perhaps if one adheres to platonic realism but I do not see how such a position is sustainable.

Even accepting the Kantian notion that we have innate a priori knowledge of the concept of numbers I don't see how that entails theism or atheism.

It is true that mathematics has application in describing things that exist within the universe, however I have yet to see mathematics deal with the notion of existence itself. The notion of existence simply escapes description within scientific and mathematical contexts - which I suspect is because we are simply epistemologically limited.

Heidegger's notion of existence for example pretty much concedes the notion that we cannot describe existence conceptually and thus ties it to consciousness, the "present-at-handness".

If we cannot describe existence conceptually, then we cannot describe existence mathematically, and thus give up a priori notions of fully understanding it. PCP did a good post on this in the philosophy forum a couple months back with similar themes (mostly attacking scientism).

Thus this has negative implications for theism, because it seriously damages the notion of knowing God's existence a priori.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

You said there is no mathematical notation for consciousness or existence. Are these 2 things known a priori? We also don't have math to describe pain, happiness, love.

The number sense a priori knowledge I always thought was just simple counting numbers usually under 10.

Math is just like Science. They are man made tools to describe reality. Good evidence points to both being incomplete or inaccurate.

I didn't say anything about consciousness except that we are epistemologically limited to talking about things in terms of consciousness, in terms of incorrigable experiences.

It is because of this divide between the subjective (our consciousness) and the objective (the world) that we simply cannot really talk about 'what existance is' or even 'what space is' etc because the description is meaningless until it relates back to incorrigable terms.

Sure we can talk about the effects of existance, space, time, etc. but the nature of them is going to escape conceptual understanding. Heidegger for example posits existance as dasein, or 'being there', which pretty much forfeits objective understanding of existance.

It's also for this reason why I think I would regard myself as an epistemological nihilist, since there is always going to be a divide between what is objectively true, and what we have access to in epistemology, thus it's rather useless to posit knowledge in terms of things we are never going to know.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 6:03:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 5:56:33 PM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/12/2015 2:51:11 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/12/2015 2:40:50 PM, TrueScotsman wrote:
Hey everyone,

Just wanted to start a discussion on this topic, of whether or not Theism is the better explanation for Mathematics.

It is apparent that mathematical abstract concepts, can be used to predict the existence of certain things in the physical universe, as can be attested through theoretical physics.

What are you thoughts on the matter?

Here are a couple good starting points:
1) Do you embrace realism or anti-realism?
2) Does the existence of mathematics promote issues for atheism, and thus support theism in your opinion.

Just share your thoughts, and please be respectful!

Best Regards,
TrueScotsman

I don't particularly see the relevance of mathematics to theism or atheism. Perhaps if one adheres to platonic realism but I do not see how such a position is sustainable.

Even accepting the Kantian notion that we have innate a priori knowledge of the concept of numbers I don't see how that entails theism or atheism.

It is true that mathematics has application in describing things that exist within the universe, however I have yet to see mathematics deal with the notion of existence itself. The notion of existence simply escapes description within scientific and mathematical contexts - which I suspect is because we are simply epistemologically limited.

Heidegger's notion of existence for example pretty much concedes the notion that we cannot describe existence conceptually and thus ties it to consciousness, the "present-at-handness".

If we cannot describe existence conceptually, then we cannot describe existence mathematically, and thus give up a priori notions of fully understanding it. PCP did a good post on this in the philosophy forum a couple months back with similar themes (mostly attacking scientism).

Thus this has negative implications for theism, because it seriously damages the notion of knowing God's existence a priori.

Perhaps it might be good to respond with a question, so I can better understand your position.

Do you think the applicability of mathematics to the natural world has any implications whether for atheism or theism?

Also,
How do you as a Nihilist view the applicability of mathematics to the natural world, is it just a mystery or convenience?

You can apply mathematics to the natural world, I just make the argument that mathematics in principle cannot say anything fundemental about existance (and thus much in the question of why the universe exists, or anything at all exists).

I don't think nihilism has much to do with it, even stephen hawking makes a similar argument, that a theory of everything might not be possible in principle. You can get an equation that describes the universe perfectly, sure, but the question of "what breathes fire into the equations" is not trivial.