Woodart wrote:Spectrum wrote:
The further exploration can be done from Kant's philosophy. (I did 3 years full time on Kant, but at present is a bit rusty on it as I was focusing on Islam since the last 2+ years.)
Roughly,
- 1. Kant asserted whatever is Mother Nature [all there is] as cognized is conditioned by humans.
2. Thus Maths emerged after the human conditions a priori [categories, etc.] and a posteriori.
3. Even the 'Sun' and 'Moon' emerged after the human conditions a priori and a posteriori.
4. Point here is, 'before' and 'after' humans are time-based.
5. Time and Space are sensible intuitions a priori which are conditioned by the mind.
6. Thus whatever is 'Mother Nature' and the Universe is always conditioned by the mind. Thing-in-themselves [noumenon] do not exist independent of the human conditions.
7. If we want to speculate more than the above, then we must understand and qualify they are mere speculations. As Wittgenstein had stated re thing-in-itself 'where we cannot speak of, we must remain silent.'
I don't want to go into a detail discussion of the above, I am merely giving a view on how far can the above ideas go as far as Kant is concern. Naturally there are counters [by realists] to the above views but having studied Kant in so much depth, I agree with his views [which are also aligned with Eastern philosophies] on the above.
I respect many of your ideas Spectrum, however many times I find it difficult to clearly understand what you are saying. If you have a point of contention – can you brake in down in simpler terms?
I was merely throwing in Kant's view re
thing-in-itself and other points. If you are not on to it, never mind.
-- Updated Sat Jul 08, 2017 9:32 pm to add the following --
Greta wrote:Are we referring to entities themselves or the model used to describe them?
Entities feature patterning in structure (spheres/pi, crystals, branching, Fibonacci sequence) and in time (natural rhythms, infolding, extrusion, time crystals) - and these structures and dynamics are modelled with mathematics. Mathematics came with humans and was logically preceded by the patterns that gave rise to it.
"Patterns" ??
If we dig deeper philosophically there is no such thing as 'patterns-in-themselves' [Kant].
Look at the letter "M" on a piece of paper. It is a pattern to humans but if you expand it a hundred times it just a 'random' arrangement of pixels of black dots. Expand it further to thousands of million times "you' [any human] will note there is no real 'M' at all.
Even with crystals, there are no crystal-in-themselves. A virus will note cognize any "crystals" at all. To a virus there is no such thing as a crystal but merely bits and pieces of molecular things.
Note an ice cube. There is no real cube pattern as there are no absolute boundaries to denote a specific cube in term of the contents of the H20.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/boundary/
At room temperature the H20 molecules are evaporating from the ice cube. As such there is no way we can identify the real ice cube.
Fibonacci sequence? The 'nautilus fibonacci sequence' is only observed by humans with human invented mathematical computations. At the molecular or atomic level, there is no specific 'nautilus fibonacci sequence.'
Here is an image re a color blind test;
The majority will see a '6' in that image because they are normal human beings.
Those who are color blind will not see a '6' but merely a circular image with small dots and circles.
I contend those who are color blind who merely see small dots are seeing something more real [factual] because they were not conditioned [brainwashed] by normal human programming.
My point is there are no patterns-in-themselves existing out there. Whatever patterns we observed are due to normal human conditioning [brainwashed] via evolution.
According to Kant, there is no thing-in-itself, no patterns-in-themselves, no mathematics-in-itself. Whatever exist are things-by-human_self.
If you don't get my point, never mind. It [Kantian philosophy] is not an easy concept to grasp plus my English is not superb to make it [such complex ideas] easier.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.