These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
Can Fichte account for the many different mathematical theories that have emerged (re. my three examples) in human history? What "-ism" do you call this? F.K. 2009/5/1 Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>: > No FK I am not a Platonist. > > We cannot think of or describe nature other than through labour processes of > some kind. But this does not imply that there are "nature's labour > processes" out there somewhere in a Kantian Jenseits, which we mirror. It > simply means that we discover objective limits to our subjective will and > this takes the form of activity which is both subjective and objective. This > goes back to Fichte strangely enough. > > Nominalism and Platonism are not the only choices. > > Andy > > Ng Foo Keong wrote: >> >> so are you saying that the different forms / brands of maths >> (small 'm') of different traditions/civilisations are just >> human maps of _The_ Mathematics (big 'm')? >> >> "The maps are not the territory", right? >> >> is there a magic Book, Somewhere Up There, where we can download >> all the maths that humans need, and maybe download instant >> understanding of maths, so children (and adults) are spared >> the pain of trying to work out their understanding of maths? >> >> F.K. >> >> >> 2009/5/1 Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>: >>> >>> Eric, >>> the cosmos existed without humans and will exist after us. But we >>> invented >>> physics, and fairly recently at that. Physics (like mathes) is a human >>> practice, practiced in a certain community of practice (institutions, >>> procedures), using a certain range of artefacts (symbols, words, >>> apparatus). >>> >>> That the material from which artefacts are made and the object of hte >>> enquiry exists independently of human activity does not prove that the >>> activity itself exists without humans. >>> >>> *All* artefacts and forms of activity rest upon a natural world which >>> exists >>> independently of us. Our practice is constrained by nature, always, and >>> is >>> never in that sense capricious. I think I can fly ... but I still come >>> crashing to the ground. Same with maths. >>> >>> Andy >> > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden: > From Erythrós Press and Media <http://www.erythrospress.com/>. > > _______________________________________________ > xmca mailing list > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca > _______________________________________________ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca