Is mathematics independent of human consciousness?
|
Yes. Though human consciousness provides a form and language for mathematics, the essentials are independent and objective. Just as a bear is a bear, regardless of the existence of taxonomy, the relationships of quantities persist regardless of the existence of human mathematics. Well, the question is silly. To assume anything but that mathematics is independent of human conscousness is assuming the very presence of humanity has a power that defies fundamental laws of physics. If you are on the side of no for this question then you're implying that without human consciousness, if there is one bear swimming in a lake (alone), and another bear jumps into the lake, there could potentially be 1,2,3, really any number of bears in the lake now due to the lack of humans to somehow tame the universe's state of entropy. It's a silly question, don't be upset when you're called out on not thinking before you post. Yes because the principles function all around us whether or not people exist to know about them or name them or perform those calculations. However, the ways we name them are purely human. What we call three some alien civilization might call blorg. And we could have just as easily called two three and three two. That may not seem like an important observation but what I'm getting at is humans are incapable of discussing and using mathematics without the shared context of our human consciousness and our human tools. Sure, people who speak different languages might still be able to do the same math problems, but then they're still sharing the common platform of a computer, or numbers, or whatever. I was hoping for more input on this topic but I didn’t realize I was in the company of renowned philosophers like Excon and logically who deemed a question that has intrigued philosophers as “ silly “ which speaks volumes about the ” type “ that now seems to be holding forth on subjects they really should leave alone Glad to see Amarel is playing devils advocate and should be interesting for anyone who cares to “ play “ Here are a couple of positions that deepen the topic for anyone interested YES: Mathematical Platonism. This school contends that mathematical objects exist independently of our being able to conceptualize them. Although few philosophers are willing to espouse this view anymore, it has had many notable proponents, even amongst logicians. Kurt Godel is perhaps the most famous example. NO: Intuitionism. Very roughly, intuitionism argues that mathematical objects are mental constructions communicable by convention. So the practice of mathematics and mathematical comprehension is a uniquely human event that ceases to exist when human minds disappear. AMBIGUOUS: Nominalism, Formalism and Logicism. There are several variations, reconstructions and weakenings of these positions that can be taken to occupy either side of the debate. |
