Philosophical Speculations

SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Sun Mar 21, 2021 3:44 pm Calculus has been a sick infant from it's birth. We do need medicine of philosophy to heal the baby, so that it can grow strong and wise.

This seems an important point, but a big topic.

Peter Jones wrote: ↑Mon Mar 22, 2021 3:46 pm

SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Sun Mar 21, 2021 3:44 pm Calculus has been a sick infant from it's birth. We do need medicine of philosophy to heal the baby, so that it can grow strong and wise.

This seems an important point, but a big topic.

A big topic indeed. My comments to your Weyl article were about some first steps in that topic.

SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Mon Mar 22, 2021 4:25 pm

Peter Jones wrote: ↑Mon Mar 22, 2021 3:46 pm

SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Sun Mar 21, 2021 3:44 pm Calculus has been a sick infant from it's birth. We do need medicine of philosophy to heal the baby, so that it can grow strong and wise.

This seems an important point, but a big topic.

A big topic indeed. My comments to your Weyl article were about some first steps in that topic.

I'd enjoy pursuing this, but it'd be off-topic here.

Peter Jones wrote: ↑Tue Mar 23, 2021 12:54 pm I'd enjoy pursuing this, but it'd be off-topic here.

Maybe, maybe not. The mod is pretty cool.

If you'd like some other platform, what that might be?

SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Tue Mar 23, 2021 1:58 pm

Peter Jones wrote: ↑Tue Mar 23, 2021 12:54 pm I'd enjoy pursuing this, but it'd be off-topic here.

Maybe, maybe not. The mod is pretty cool.

If Simon had wanted to keep this thread strictly 'on topic', and not digressing into tangential themes, as just about every topic seems to do in this section, I assume he would have posted it in the 'formal discussions' section. But if you feel it deserves a room of its own, go for it.

Not sure if "here" referred to this thread or this forum. There's another thread called 'more-less mathematics' on the front page, but perhaps the formal section would be best, if this forum is OK.

SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:28 pm Not sure if "here" referred to this thread or this forum. There's another thread called 'more-less mathematics' on the front page, but perhaps the formal section would be best, if this forum is OK.

Well, I must concede that much of this math stuff is out of my league, and I'm not always clear on its metaphysical aspect, but when you write this ...

SanteriSatama wrote: "Calculus has been a sick infant from it's birth. We do need medicine of philosophy to heal the baby, so that it can grow strong and wise."

... I'm not sure why it would be unsuitable in this forum, unless it's somehow related to antagonistic, us-vs-them, polarized partisan politics.

Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:12 pm If Simon had wanted to keep this thread strictly 'on topic', and not digressing into tangential themes, as just about every topic seems to do in this section, I assume he would have posted it in the 'formal discussions' section. But if you feel it deserves a room of its own, go for it.

Yes, this topic was just my little rant as I was skimming through some areas of philosophy, so I’m more than happy for it to be diverted.

Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:42 pm

SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:28 pm Not sure if "here" referred to this thread or this forum. There's another thread called 'more-less mathematics' on the front page, but perhaps the formal section would be best, if this forum is OK.

Well, I must concede that much of this math stuff is out of my league, and I'm not always clear on its metaphysical aspect, but when you write this ...

SanteriSatama wrote: "Calculus has been a sick infant from it's birth. We do need medicine of philosophy to heal the baby, so that it can grow strong and wise."

... I'm not sure why it would be unsuitable in this forum, unless it's somehow related to antagonistic, us-vs-them, polarized partisan politics.

I thought the OP wouldn't want to wander off, but it seems he;s okay with it.

I presume the point about the calculus made by SanteriSatama is the status of infinitesimals and the modeling of the number line as a series of them. The approach works for calculations, but it has philosophical problems. Is this the issue? .

Peter Jones wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 10:46 am I presume the point about the calculus made by SanteriSatama is the status of infinitesimals and the modeling of the number line as a series of them. The approach works for calculations, but it has philosophical problems. Is this the issue? .

A major part of the issue. Philosophy of language, continuity, infinity and time are inseparable from it, so it's a handful.

While the most general level can't be kept apart, mathematical focus offers hope to be able to discuss with more clarity.

A natural starting point/region could be sense-making of the key disagreements in the Brouwer-Hilbert controversy (in which Weyl played on both sides), wider implications of those disagreement, and how they look now in the light of advances in computation theory, Wittgenstein-Badiou "controversy", etc.