My definition of “reality” is: the thing that sometimes falsifies my hypotheses. Math “kicks back” theopensociety.net/2013/09/realit
Conversation
1
Math is a falsifiable explanatory system. Relationships to our perceptions of reality are nonessential. Math is still true on LSD.
1
2
Math is the ultimate solipsistic system. I'm not interested in my mind (it's terrible), I'm interested in what's out there.
1
Ah, I see. I think we found the difference; I’m not instrumental about knowledge.
3
Consciousness is also fake btw. Dualism is bunk.
1
I don’t think “fake” is meaningful when talking about epistemology. But consciousness is emergent, sure, and dualism is bunk, yes.
1
I am being overly dramatic when I say fake. What I mean is "not an object"
2
Oh, sure. But we spend much of our lives interacting with “non-objects.” So isn’t it still meaningful to make theories about them?
2
it is very useful, but it is important to keep firmly in mind when we are discussing the abstract and when not
1
Replying to
Is it? How does the distinction affect your behavior or predictions?