Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Hello Philosophers!

What is the relationship between mind and matter, matter and non-matter? Is there an unexplained ‘phenomenon’ associated with an object’s existence? Matter itself, seems critical to proving certain things like gravity. But this ‘proof’ is only a ‘manifestation’ of gravity; not gravity itself. For instance, we can only prove, that things like gravity (itself) exist through the manifestations of observable material objects that move in space and time.

With respect to metaphysics, what about the nature of existence things like mathematics or even consciousness itself? Can we only prove sentient things like love/music (not to mention math) all exists through observation/manifestation of material objects or sense data (Greek Philia/Eros and Kantian aesthetics)? How does the existence of sentient sense data interact with all objects in order to make sense of same?

With respect to matter’s purpose and meaning, one method of understanding the nature of things, is through the logic of mathematics/abstract metaphysical structures. For instance, much like consciousness itself, the existence of math and numbers seems to have a mysterious quality to them, a shadowy existence. First, consider that math itself has no Darwinian survival advantages (intellectual knowledge of the laws of gravity are not required to evade falling objects in the jungle). Then consider that they can so effectively describe the cosmological initial conditions (prior to the BB/theory), as well as other metaphysical features of existence (i.e., time, space, gravity, energy, not to mention Pythagoreanism/music, etc. etc.).

Once we start looking around, it’s easy to find other examples of metaphysically abstract structures that can be helpful in describing a thing’s existence. From the shape of soap bubbles (Plateau’s law) to gear design in engines, to the location and size of ring gaps of Saturn, to Bee honeycombs (emergent/genetic information) mathematics seems to be everywhere.

I often use ‘structural engineering’ as a lucid example of the metaphysical nature of math, and what is behind a material thing’s existence, the object. Consider looking at a bridge or tall building, and that the creation of its structure is mathematical. For instance, we know that whether it’s concrete, wood or steel (or some other composite) math is simply used to create and mass produce the structure (the making of beams/girders, etc). So when we look at a physical structure or object, its unseen nature exists as a metaphysical ‘world’ of numbers and formulas. And of course, cosmologically, at its most basic level of existence, math is typically used to describe an object’s fundamental properties (atoms, protons, neutrons, etc.).

To quickly sum-up, below are some bullet point suppositions (not an exhaustive list) that posit the nature of math’s existence, that taken as a whole, seems paradoxical and logically impossible (how can math be both objective and metaphysical at the same time/an unchanging truth that describes a world of change, etc.):
1. Math is objective
2. Math doesn't care what people thing about it (necessarily)
3. Math is metaphysical
4. Math is an unchanging truth
5. Math describes the universe
6. Math has no Darwinian survival advantages
7. Analytic propositions are the same (process of deduction/a priori) as the nature of Math.

As the relationship between mind and matter blurs, it becomes harder to say which parts of the world are physical and which are truly mathematical or metaphysical (i.e., the Will v. the Intellect). But more importantly, for those physicalist/materialists who embrace the logic of mathematics, the dynamic world of observable objects literally appears to be something that exists, yet is beyond logic and pure reason. Its true nature of existence is not material, except through the paradox of a mathematically abstract existence.

Philosophical questions: What other ‘things’ are considered somewhat abstract, yet exist? Could an ‘object’ have its own independent existence? If not, through what method of knowledge can we be certain? Would that means/method of knowledge itself be a logically necessary ‘truth’ that is physical, metaphysical, or both? And what about the conscious/subconscious mind itself, and other conscious phenomena/Qualia? Bonus questions: Are all these things that exist ‘purely logical’ (without paradox/contradiction) in themselves? Is genetically coded ‘information’ somehow behind existence (what breaths fire into the equasions)?
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3218
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by JackDaydream »

@3017Metaphysician
Having told you that I disliked maths so much, I can remember being amazed at Pythagoras' hypotenuse triangle at age 9 or 10. It seemed almost 'magical'. I think that there is so much wonder in maths and it may be about having the right teacher. Definitely maths is a central part of finding out knowledge of the physical world, especially measuring and understanding the nature of design. Architecture depends upon it and the ancient people seem to have been able to work out the methods of maths.

One interesting aspect is that maths does not change in its basic logic and it does mean that it is more of a metaphysical reality, even though it translates into physical objects. But, it is so fundamental to the measurement of bodies, time, astronomy and computing. The numbers and symbols stand for something, rather like the alphabet. Another aspect which I find fascinating is the concept of infinity which implies no end, like eternity.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

JackDaydream wrote: November 29th, 2021, 3:59 pm @3017Metaphysician
Having told you that I disliked maths so much, I can remember being amazed at Pythagoras' hypotenuse triangle at age 9 or 10. It seemed almost 'magical'. I think that there is so much wonder in maths and it may be about having the right teacher. Definitely maths is a central part of finding out knowledge of the physical world, especially measuring and understanding the nature of design. Architecture depends upon it and the ancient people seem to have been able to work out the methods of maths.

One interesting aspect is that maths does not change in its basic logic and it does mean that it is more of a metaphysical reality, even though it translates into physical objects. But, it is so fundamental to the measurement of bodies, time, astronomy and computing. The numbers and symbols stand for something, rather like the alphabet. Another aspect which I find fascinating is the concept of infinity which implies no end, like eternity.
Jack!

...indeed. The concept of eternity is intriguing. As such, the theories of eternal expansion (other universes that exist interminably), multiverse/bubble universes, and even the old Block Universe theory all more or less suggest a view of the universe by an observer outside of space and time. Of course the eternal expansion theory seems to make all of time temporal yet eternal/timelessness. And the BB seems to have lost its appeal recently, which still begs the questions of not only what was happening prior, but where the BB Singularity came from in the first place (kind of like the theory of evolution only posits an already existing ensemble of competitors, conveniently excluding the 'first one'/ex nihilo). Perhaps that's where the concept of God or a mathematical super-turtle rears its head. And of course, throw-in all the other why's of existence and meaning of life questions... .

Anyway, Sean Carrol/physicist is a pretty good source there, when it comes to the concept of eternity. As an aside, I'm currently thinking about the 'physics of information' and hope to come up with something soon... . Biology, genetically coded information, emergence of consciousness and other phenomena in nature seem to be similar to the existence of mathematics, yet different... .
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3218
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by JackDaydream »

@3017Metaphysician
Part of the underlying question may be about the basis of how models of reality, including perspectives about consciousness, are based on that which can be thought about through mathematical deductions and analysis. The October/ November edition of ' Philosophy Now" magazine has the theme, 'What is Really Real'. It includes an article on maths.

The article is by Adrian Brockless, 'Is Mathematics in the Fabric of the Universe?' The author says,
'For those who maintain that mathematics is in the fabric of the universe, the stability that exists in mathematical propositions is understood to exist in the nature of things- in features such as ideal shapes or ratios: perfect circles, plants cells, etc...Genuine mathematical knowledge is said to be absolute and beyond any empirical justification, which is vulnerable to error.'

Here, the author is pointing to the way in which maths is about objective ideas. However, he does point to the way in which maths and language are combined together in human constructs of meaning.

As far as eternity and infinity are concerned, especially in going beyond space and time, that is really about what is unseen. I know that many see it as a dubious area, especially materialists. I definitely keep an open mind to there being possible forms of existence beyond the physical. I wonder to what extent this would be about objects beyond the physical world. It may be that writers like Kant, Plato and others like Jung and Maslow were able to tap into the more 'transcendent' aspects of reality beyond the apparent division between body and mind, and view glimmers of eternity itself.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

JackDaydream wrote: November 30th, 2021, 11:59 am @3017Metaphysician
Part of the underlying question may be about the basis of how models of reality, including perspectives about consciousness, are based on that which can be thought about through mathematical deductions and analysis. The October/ November edition of ' Philosophy Now" magazine has the theme, 'What is Really Real'. It includes an article on maths.

The article is by Adrian Brockless, 'Is Mathematics in the Fabric of the Universe?' The author says,
'For those who maintain that mathematics is in the fabric of the universe, the stability that exists in mathematical propositions is understood to exist in the nature of things- in features such as ideal shapes or ratios: perfect circles, plants cells, etc...Genuine mathematical knowledge is said to be absolute and beyond any empirical justification, which is vulnerable to error.'

Here, the author is pointing to the way in which maths is about objective ideas. However, he does point to the way in which maths and language are combined together in human constructs of meaning.

As far as eternity and infinity are concerned, especially in going beyond space and time, that is really about what is unseen. I know that many see it as a dubious area, especially materialists. I definitely keep an open mind to there being possible forms of existence beyond the physical. I wonder to what extent this would be about objects beyond the physical world. It may be that writers like Kant, Plato and others like Jung and Maslow were able to tap into the more 'transcendent' aspects of reality beyond the apparent division between body and mind, and view glimmers of eternity itself.
Jack!

Thanks for the heads-up, I'll want to check out the recent copy of Philosophy Now.

Keep in mind, with respect to metaphysics, the existence of time is much like gravity. The existence of gravity is demonstrated through objects, but gravity itself is not an object or thing to be seen. You can only observe the effects of gravity. Similarly, as perceivers, we only have a conceptual grip of time. We do not perceive time itself; we perceive events in time and represent it through the changing states of the Universe. Time, then, does not necessarily exist as an entity in itself.

I suppose if you want to physically observe time, one method would be to look at a shadow on a sun dial. But that 'shadowy existence' is only a metaphor for the nature of time's reality. Perhaps in an ironic way, we are back to Platonism among other things...
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3218
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by JackDaydream »

@3017Metaphysician
I have thought for such a long time how the relationship between the visible and invisible is so complex. Indeed, gravity can only be observed indirectly through keeping one's feet on the ground, rather than leaving us floating around in space. The observation of time and effects is also interesting. Apart from clocks the processes of time can be seen in the aging process. I have a friend who asks me how old she looks almost every time I see her and this has been since she was 19. Most of the time we don't notice changes because they are gradual, but they are happening. Such aspects may be central to what it means to live as embodied beings in a world of objects which can be measured and quantified mathematically.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7089
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by Sculptor1 »

3017Metaphysician wrote: November 29th, 2021, 3:27 pm Hello Philosophers!

What is the relationship between mind and matter, matter and non-matter? Is there an unexplained ‘phenomenon’ associated with an object’s existence? Matter itself, seems critical to proving certain things like gravity. But this ‘proof’ is only a ‘manifestation’ of gravity; not gravity itself. For instance, we can only prove, that things like gravity (itself) exist through the manifestations of observable material objects that move in space and time.

With respect to metaphysics, what about the nature of existence things like mathematics or even consciousness itself? Can we only prove sentient things like love/music (not to mention math) all exists through observation/manifestation of material objects or sense data (Greek Philia/Eros and Kantian aesthetics)? How does the existence of sentient sense data interact with all objects in order to make sense of same?

With respect to matter’s purpose and meaning, one method of understanding the nature of things, is through the logic of mathematics/abstract metaphysical structures. For instance, much like consciousness itself, the existence of math and numbers seems to have a mysterious quality to them, a shadowy existence. First, consider that math itself has no Darwinian survival advantages (intellectual knowledge of the laws of gravity are not required to evade falling objects in the jungle). Then consider that they can so effectively describe the cosmological initial conditions (prior to the BB/theory), as well as other metaphysical features of existence (i.e., time, space, gravity, energy, not to mention Pythagoreanism/music, etc. etc.).

Once we start looking around, it’s easy to find other examples of metaphysically abstract structures that can be helpful in describing a thing’s existence. From the shape of soap bubbles (Plateau’s law) to gear design in engines, to the location and size of ring gaps of Saturn, to Bee honeycombs (emergent/genetic information) mathematics seems to be everywhere.

I often use ‘structural engineering’ as a lucid example of the metaphysical nature of math, and what is behind a material thing’s existence, the object. Consider looking at a bridge or tall building, and that the creation of its structure is mathematical. For instance, we know that whether it’s concrete, wood or steel (or some other composite) math is simply used to create and mass produce the structure (the making of beams/girders, etc). So when we look at a physical structure or object, its unseen nature exists as a metaphysical ‘world’ of numbers and formulas. And of course, cosmologically, at its most basic level of existence, math is typically used to describe an object’s fundamental properties (atoms, protons, neutrons, etc.).

To quickly sum-up, below are some bullet point suppositions (not an exhaustive list) that posit the nature of math’s existence, that taken as a whole, seems paradoxical and logically impossible (how can math be both objective and metaphysical at the same time/an unchanging truth that describes a world of change, etc.):
1. Math is objective
2. Math doesn't care what people thing about it (necessarily)
3. Math is metaphysical
4. Math is an unchanging truth
5. Math describes the universe
6. Math has no Darwinian survival advantages
7. Analytic propositions are the same (process of deduction/a priori) as the nature of Math.

As the relationship between mind and matter blurs, it becomes harder to say which parts of the world are physical and which are truly mathematical or metaphysical (i.e., the Will v. the Intellect). But more importantly, for those physicalist/materialists who embrace the logic of mathematics, the dynamic world of observable objects literally appears to be something that exists, yet is beyond logic and pure reason. Its true nature of existence is not material, except through the paradox of a mathematically abstract existence.

Philosophical questions: What other ‘things’ are considered somewhat abstract, yet exist? Could an ‘object’ have its own independent existence? If not, through what method of knowledge can we be certain? Would that means/method of knowledge itself be a logically necessary ‘truth’ that is physical, metaphysical, or both? And what about the conscious/subconscious mind itself, and other conscious phenomena/Qualia? Bonus questions: Are all these things that exist ‘purely logical’ (without paradox/contradiction) in themselves? Is genetically coded ‘information’ somehow behind existence (what breaths fire into the equasions)?
Point FIVE is all you need to know. Everything else comes from that.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Sculptor1 wrote: November 30th, 2021, 5:45 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: November 29th, 2021, 3:27 pm Hello Philosophers!

What is the relationship between mind and matter, matter and non-matter? Is there an unexplained ‘phenomenon’ associated with an object’s existence? Matter itself, seems critical to proving certain things like gravity. But this ‘proof’ is only a ‘manifestation’ of gravity; not gravity itself. For instance, we can only prove, that things like gravity (itself) exist through the manifestations of observable material objects that move in space and time.

With respect to metaphysics, what about the nature of existence things like mathematics or even consciousness itself? Can we only prove sentient things like love/music (not to mention math) all exists through observation/manifestation of material objects or sense data (Greek Philia/Eros and Kantian aesthetics)? How does the existence of sentient sense data interact with all objects in order to make sense of same?

With respect to matter’s purpose and meaning, one method of understanding the nature of things, is through the logic of mathematics/abstract metaphysical structures. For instance, much like consciousness itself, the existence of math and numbers seems to have a mysterious quality to them, a shadowy existence. First, consider that math itself has no Darwinian survival advantages (intellectual knowledge of the laws of gravity are not required to evade falling objects in the jungle). Then consider that they can so effectively describe the cosmological initial conditions (prior to the BB/theory), as well as other metaphysical features of existence (i.e., time, space, gravity, energy, not to mention Pythagoreanism/music, etc. etc.).

Once we start looking around, it’s easy to find other examples of metaphysically abstract structures that can be helpful in describing a thing’s existence. From the shape of soap bubbles (Plateau’s law) to gear design in engines, to the location and size of ring gaps of Saturn, to Bee honeycombs (emergent/genetic information) mathematics seems to be everywhere.

I often use ‘structural engineering’ as a lucid example of the metaphysical nature of math, and what is behind a material thing’s existence, the object. Consider looking at a bridge or tall building, and that the creation of its structure is mathematical. For instance, we know that whether it’s concrete, wood or steel (or some other composite) math is simply used to create and mass produce the structure (the making of beams/girders, etc). So when we look at a physical structure or object, its unseen nature exists as a metaphysical ‘world’ of numbers and formulas. And of course, cosmologically, at its most basic level of existence, math is typically used to describe an object’s fundamental properties (atoms, protons, neutrons, etc.).

To quickly sum-up, below are some bullet point suppositions (not an exhaustive list) that posit the nature of math’s existence, that taken as a whole, seems paradoxical and logically impossible (how can math be both objective and metaphysical at the same time/an unchanging truth that describes a world of change, etc.):
1. Math is objective
2. Math doesn't care what people thing about it (necessarily)
3. Math is metaphysical
4. Math is an unchanging truth
5. Math describes the universe
6. Math has no Darwinian survival advantages
7. Analytic propositions are the same (process of deduction/a priori) as the nature of Math.

As the relationship between mind and matter blurs, it becomes harder to say which parts of the world are physical and which are truly mathematical or metaphysical (i.e., the Will v. the Intellect). But more importantly, for those physicalist/materialists who embrace the logic of mathematics, the dynamic world of observable objects literally appears to be something that exists, yet is beyond logic and pure reason. Its true nature of existence is not material, except through the paradox of a mathematically abstract existence.

Philosophical questions: What other ‘things’ are considered somewhat abstract, yet exist? Could an ‘object’ have its own independent existence? If not, through what method of knowledge can we be certain? Would that means/method of knowledge itself be a logically necessary ‘truth’ that is physical, metaphysical, or both? And what about the conscious/subconscious mind itself, and other conscious phenomena/Qualia? Bonus questions: Are all these things that exist ‘purely logical’ (without paradox/contradiction) in themselves? Is genetically coded ‘information’ somehow behind existence (what breaths fire into the equasions)?
Point FIVE is all you need to know. Everything else comes from that.
As a philosopher, and please don't take this the wrong way, but you couldn't be further from the truth. Unless of course, you're implying that math cannot explain (not describe) the nature of all reality. But since it can't explain things, a ToE would be needed to at least provide for more insight (combining relativity, gravity, QM etc.). In the meantime, and similarly, you may want to consider the God particle (the Higgs Boson field).

As such, one thing we do know in fundamental physics (particle physics) is that the basic features of the universe are (sometimes invisible) fields. Or Quantum fields if you like. The Higgs Boson field is such a field as it can come in and out of existence, yet it helps create mass.

Anyway,, just for fun, if you are suggesting that math is somehow a sacred cow, are you also prepared to acknowledge its existential and metaphysical qualities? Did it exist prior to the theory of the BB? Please share your own theory (about the existence of math and its nature) if you are able.

Otherwise, 'fields' and information are mysterious things-in-themselves. You know, kind of like the concept or axiom of a God :)
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7089
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by Sculptor1 »

3017Metaphysician wrote: December 1st, 2021, 10:46 am
Sculptor1 wrote: November 30th, 2021, 5:45 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: November 29th, 2021, 3:27 pm Hello Philosophers!

What is the relationship between mind and matter, matter and non-matter? Is there an unexplained ‘phenomenon’ associated with an object’s existence? Matter itself, seems critical to proving certain things like gravity. But this ‘proof’ is only a ‘manifestation’ of gravity; not gravity itself. For instance, we can only prove, that things like gravity (itself) exist through the manifestations of observable material objects that move in space and time.

With respect to metaphysics, what about the nature of existence things like mathematics or even consciousness itself? Can we only prove sentient things like love/music (not to mention math) all exists through observation/manifestation of material objects or sense data (Greek Philia/Eros and Kantian aesthetics)? How does the existence of sentient sense data interact with all objects in order to make sense of same?

With respect to matter’s purpose and meaning, one method of understanding the nature of things, is through the logic of mathematics/abstract metaphysical structures. For instance, much like consciousness itself, the existence of math and numbers seems to have a mysterious quality to them, a shadowy existence. First, consider that math itself has no Darwinian survival advantages (intellectual knowledge of the laws of gravity are not required to evade falling objects in the jungle). Then consider that they can so effectively describe the cosmological initial conditions (prior to the BB/theory), as well as other metaphysical features of existence (i.e., time, space, gravity, energy, not to mention Pythagoreanism/music, etc. etc.).

Once we start looking around, it’s easy to find other examples of metaphysically abstract structures that can be helpful in describing a thing’s existence. From the shape of soap bubbles (Plateau’s law) to gear design in engines, to the location and size of ring gaps of Saturn, to Bee honeycombs (emergent/genetic information) mathematics seems to be everywhere.

I often use ‘structural engineering’ as a lucid example of the metaphysical nature of math, and what is behind a material thing’s existence, the object. Consider looking at a bridge or tall building, and that the creation of its structure is mathematical. For instance, we know that whether it’s concrete, wood or steel (or some other composite) math is simply used to create and mass produce the structure (the making of beams/girders, etc). So when we look at a physical structure or object, its unseen nature exists as a metaphysical ‘world’ of numbers and formulas. And of course, cosmologically, at its most basic level of existence, math is typically used to describe an object’s fundamental properties (atoms, protons, neutrons, etc.).

To quickly sum-up, below are some bullet point suppositions (not an exhaustive list) that posit the nature of math’s existence, that taken as a whole, seems paradoxical and logically impossible (how can math be both objective and metaphysical at the same time/an unchanging truth that describes a world of change, etc.):
1. Math is objective
2. Math doesn't care what people thing about it (necessarily)
3. Math is metaphysical
4. Math is an unchanging truth
5. Math describes the universe
6. Math has no Darwinian survival advantages
7. Analytic propositions are the same (process of deduction/a priori) as the nature of Math.

As the relationship between mind and matter blurs, it becomes harder to say which parts of the world are physical and which are truly mathematical or metaphysical (i.e., the Will v. the Intellect). But more importantly, for those physicalist/materialists who embrace the logic of mathematics, the dynamic world of observable objects literally appears to be something that exists, yet is beyond logic and pure reason. Its true nature of existence is not material, except through the paradox of a mathematically abstract existence.

Philosophical questions: What other ‘things’ are considered somewhat abstract, yet exist? Could an ‘object’ have its own independent existence? If not, through what method of knowledge can we be certain? Would that means/method of knowledge itself be a logically necessary ‘truth’ that is physical, metaphysical, or both? And what about the conscious/subconscious mind itself, and other conscious phenomena/Qualia? Bonus questions: Are all these things that exist ‘purely logical’ (without paradox/contradiction) in themselves? Is genetically coded ‘information’ somehow behind existence (what breaths fire into the equasions)?
Point FIVE is all you need to know. Everything else comes from that.
As a philosopher, and please don't take this the wrong way, but you couldn't be further from the truth. Unless of course, you're implying that math cannot explain (not describe) the nature of all reality.
No. I mean exactly that maths is a tool devised by humans to describe the universe. i.e. Maths is descriptive.

And maths has many limitation which indicate that is is absolutely nothing more than that. It uses many things that do not, and cannot exist in nature and others that simply do not even fit into its own schema.
If you had not been so high minded in your response I'd explain that all to you. But your response leads me to think that you are not going to engage.
If you are interested in picking up any of these points, in particular let me know.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Sculptor1 wrote: December 1st, 2021, 11:47 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: December 1st, 2021, 10:46 am
Sculptor1 wrote: November 30th, 2021, 5:45 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: November 29th, 2021, 3:27 pm Hello Philosophers!

What is the relationship between mind and matter, matter and non-matter? Is there an unexplained ‘phenomenon’ associated with an object’s existence? Matter itself, seems critical to proving certain things like gravity. But this ‘proof’ is only a ‘manifestation’ of gravity; not gravity itself. For instance, we can only prove, that things like gravity (itself) exist through the manifestations of observable material objects that move in space and time.

With respect to metaphysics, what about the nature of existence things like mathematics or even consciousness itself? Can we only prove sentient things like love/music (not to mention math) all exists through observation/manifestation of material objects or sense data (Greek Philia/Eros and Kantian aesthetics)? How does the existence of sentient sense data interact with all objects in order to make sense of same?

With respect to matter’s purpose and meaning, one method of understanding the nature of things, is through the logic of mathematics/abstract metaphysical structures. For instance, much like consciousness itself, the existence of math and numbers seems to have a mysterious quality to them, a shadowy existence. First, consider that math itself has no Darwinian survival advantages (intellectual knowledge of the laws of gravity are not required to evade falling objects in the jungle). Then consider that they can so effectively describe the cosmological initial conditions (prior to the BB/theory), as well as other metaphysical features of existence (i.e., time, space, gravity, energy, not to mention Pythagoreanism/music, etc. etc.).

Once we start looking around, it’s easy to find other examples of metaphysically abstract structures that can be helpful in describing a thing’s existence. From the shape of soap bubbles (Plateau’s law) to gear design in engines, to the location and size of ring gaps of Saturn, to Bee honeycombs (emergent/genetic information) mathematics seems to be everywhere.

I often use ‘structural engineering’ as a lucid example of the metaphysical nature of math, and what is behind a material thing’s existence, the object. Consider looking at a bridge or tall building, and that the creation of its structure is mathematical. For instance, we know that whether it’s concrete, wood or steel (or some other composite) math is simply used to create and mass produce the structure (the making of beams/girders, etc). So when we look at a physical structure or object, its unseen nature exists as a metaphysical ‘world’ of numbers and formulas. And of course, cosmologically, at its most basic level of existence, math is typically used to describe an object’s fundamental properties (atoms, protons, neutrons, etc.).

To quickly sum-up, below are some bullet point suppositions (not an exhaustive list) that posit the nature of math’s existence, that taken as a whole, seems paradoxical and logically impossible (how can math be both objective and metaphysical at the same time/an unchanging truth that describes a world of change, etc.):
1. Math is objective
2. Math doesn't care what people thing about it (necessarily)
3. Math is metaphysical
4. Math is an unchanging truth
5. Math describes the universe
6. Math has no Darwinian survival advantages
7. Analytic propositions are the same (process of deduction/a priori) as the nature of Math.

As the relationship between mind and matter blurs, it becomes harder to say which parts of the world are physical and which are truly mathematical or metaphysical (i.e., the Will v. the Intellect). But more importantly, for those physicalist/materialists who embrace the logic of mathematics, the dynamic world of observable objects literally appears to be something that exists, yet is beyond logic and pure reason. Its true nature of existence is not material, except through the paradox of a mathematically abstract existence.

Philosophical questions: What other ‘things’ are considered somewhat abstract, yet exist? Could an ‘object’ have its own independent existence? If not, through what method of knowledge can we be certain? Would that means/method of knowledge itself be a logically necessary ‘truth’ that is physical, metaphysical, or both? And what about the conscious/subconscious mind itself, and other conscious phenomena/Qualia? Bonus questions: Are all these things that exist ‘purely logical’ (without paradox/contradiction) in themselves? Is genetically coded ‘information’ somehow behind existence (what breaths fire into the equasions)?
Point FIVE is all you need to know. Everything else comes from that.
As a philosopher, and please don't take this the wrong way, but you couldn't be further from the truth. Unless of course, you're implying that math cannot explain (not describe) the nature of all reality.
No. I mean exactly that maths is a tool devised by humans to describe the universe. i.e. Maths is descriptive.

And maths has many limitation which indicate that is is absolutely nothing more than that. It uses many things that do not, and cannot exist in nature and others that simply do not even fit into its own schema.
If you had not been so high minded in your response I'd explain that all to you. But your response leads me to think that you are not going to engage.
If you are interested in picking up any of these points, in particular let me know.
Sure, "the floor is yours"!
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by Terrapin Station »

The "nature" of a physical object is that it's concrete and physical.

So it's not abstract, and it has nothing to do with logic.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Terrapin Station wrote: December 1st, 2021, 3:43 pm The "nature" of a physical object is that it's concrete and physical.

So it's not abstract, and it has nothing to do with logic.
Welcome!

I'll accept a challenge! Let's see, I'll play along too, where shall we begin, I wonder... . Would you like to start with a physical/logical/objective explanation of consciousness? Or, perhaps more closer to the vest, since you are a 'physicist' can you make a physical universe ex nihilo? Meaning, since we are discussing first principles (Metaphysics), would you happen to have the mathematical formula handy for say a ToE? How about biological emergence from matter to mind?

Anyway, all kidding aside TS, what (part of math) would you like to argue; math not being abstract and/or logical? Thanks for chiming in... .

:P
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by Terrapin Station »

3017Metaphysician wrote: December 1st, 2021, 4:38 pm I'll accept a challenge! Let's see, I'll play along too, where shall we begin, I wonder... . Would you like to start with a physical/logical/objective explanation of consciousness?
With you meeting the requirement I outlined for you long ago:

I'll only do a discussion about whether anything has an explanation or not IF we first do the following, which I just laid out again a couple days ago:

"As I've commented time and time again, the first thing that needs to be tackled is a 'philosophy of explanations' in general. We can't critique whether something works as an explanation or not if we don't rigorously tackle a philosophy of explanations first.

"We need to pin down just what the criteria for explanations are--it needs to be literally spelled out in at least a cluster property manner--and we need to tackle just WHY are proposed criteria should be the criteria. A 'subsection' of this is going to have to tackle philosophy of meaning in a plausible way, because it's going to need to address how expressions have meaning and how that all manages to 'link up' or not with other things. And all of this needs to be done in a way that in general, things that are intuitively accepted as explanations can meet the criteria and things that are intuitively considered unexplained do not meet the criteria."

Unsurprisingly, you never followed through with this at all. We didn't even begin. I'd bet my life that the same thing will happen again.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Terrapin Station wrote: December 1st, 2021, 4:56 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: December 1st, 2021, 4:38 pm I'll accept a challenge! Let's see, I'll play along too, where shall we begin, I wonder... . Would you like to start with a physical/logical/objective explanation of consciousness?
With you meeting the requirement I outlined for you long ago:

I'll only do a discussion about whether anything has an explanation or not IF we first do the following, which I just laid out again a couple days ago:

"As I've commented time and time again, the first thing that needs to be tackled is a 'philosophy of explanations' in general. We can't critique whether something works as an explanation or not if we don't rigorously tackle a philosophy of explanations first.

"We need to pin down just what the criteria for explanations are--it needs to be literally spelled out in at least a cluster property manner--and we need to tackle just WHY are proposed criteria should be the criteria. A 'subsection' of this is going to have to tackle philosophy of meaning in a plausible way, because it's going to need to address how expressions have meaning and how that all manages to 'link up' or not with other things. And all of this needs to be done in a way that in general, things that are intuitively accepted as explanations can meet the criteria and things that are intuitively considered unexplained do not meet the criteria."

Unsurprisingly, you never followed through with this at all. We didn't even begin. I'd bet my life that the same thing will happen again.
Thanks! I'll play along.

RE: TS said: "The "nature" of a physical object is that it's concrete and physical. So it's not abstract, and it has nothing to do with logic."

The short answer is that the criteria is Math in the OP. Hence, support your above statement/supposition.

First request.

:)
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Math: is the nature of a physical object abstract, logical or beyond logic?

Post by Terrapin Station »

3017Metaphysician wrote: December 1st, 2021, 5:08 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: December 1st, 2021, 4:56 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: December 1st, 2021, 4:38 pm I'll accept a challenge! Let's see, I'll play along too, where shall we begin, I wonder... . Would you like to start with a physical/logical/objective explanation of consciousness?
With you meeting the requirement I outlined for you long ago:

I'll only do a discussion about whether anything has an explanation or not IF we first do the following, which I just laid out again a couple days ago:

"As I've commented time and time again, the first thing that needs to be tackled is a 'philosophy of explanations' in general. We can't critique whether something works as an explanation or not if we don't rigorously tackle a philosophy of explanations first.

"We need to pin down just what the criteria for explanations are--it needs to be literally spelled out in at least a cluster property manner--and we need to tackle just WHY are proposed criteria should be the criteria. A 'subsection' of this is going to have to tackle philosophy of meaning in a plausible way, because it's going to need to address how expressions have meaning and how that all manages to 'link up' or not with other things. And all of this needs to be done in a way that in general, things that are intuitively accepted as explanations can meet the criteria and things that are intuitively considered unexplained do not meet the criteria."

Unsurprisingly, you never followed through with this at all. We didn't even begin. I'd bet my life that the same thing will happen again.
Thanks! I'll play along.

RE: TS said: "The "nature" of a physical object is that it's concrete and physical. So it's not abstract, and it has nothing to do with logic."

The short answer is that the criteria is Math in the OP. Hence, support your above statement/supposition.

First request.

:)
That's it? Your criteria for whether x is an explanation is simply the word "math"??? What about math?

And what happened to when I said, "a 'subsection of this is going to have to tackle philosophy of meaning in a plausible way"?

Is your answer to that also just the word "math"?
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021