@litgenstein can one be a finitist (properly so-called) without being a mathematical platonist?
to me the two are inseparable
-
I’d think so: you can formulate the former such that it only concerns first order mathematical results (we don’t accept infinities in maths), and the latter is on a more meta level (the metaphysics of mathematical objects)
What’s the demarcation criterion for what we accept in maths? seems like anything logically consistent is equally good
