Timeline for Is there a category even more general than "thing"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 25 at 18:25 | comment | added | ConformalSymmetry | @JimBalter An abstract inference is a movement of reason, and an existence theorem proves whether a mathematical object exists. Here I understand existing as "being according to the mode proper to the object under consideration" which is here specifically mathematical objects. Ontology comes from the Greek ontos (being) and logos (word, concept, reason). I fail to understand how an existence theorem is not ontological. Perhaps there is an equivocation on "existing"? | |
| Jun 25 at 5:49 | comment | added | Jim Balter | Mathematicians don't prove that objects exist, they prove that sets aren't empty: "there exists an x such that <description>" means that the set of things with that description isn't empty. This "exists" isn't even ontological, it's an abstract inference from a set of formal axioms. | |
| Jun 25 at 3:47 | comment | added | ConformalSymmetry | Illustrative remark: observe that one of the first things (and sometimes the only thing) that a mathematician can prove about a mathematical object is that it exists. | |
| S Jun 25 at 3:43 | review | First answers | |||
| Jun 25 at 14:27 | |||||
| S Jun 25 at 3:43 | history | answered | ConformalSymmetry | CC BY-SA 4.0 |