2)Meaning that - in the particular context in which we commonly understand math (the axioms, scales, etc that are used in everyday math) 2+2 does not equal 5. Objectively speaking, in that particular context, 2+2 does not equal 5.
-
-
Replying to @GhostMantis @arthur_affect and
To bring up other scales or axioms in which 2+2=5 is disregarding the original context -the wildly obvious context- intended. Within this particular context it is objectively true that 2+2=4. There is no room for subjectivity of any kind.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
The use of the term "subjectivism" here is culture war bullshit that's beating on a strawman, that's my whole point
1 reply 1 retweet 26 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @GhostMantis and
There is no such thing as a "subjectivist" or its opposite, an "objectivist", in reality If you think that's what the two sides are here you're being an asshole
3 replies 2 retweets 24 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @GhostMantis and
My own example of why 2+2=5 sometimes is very much about this asshole definition of "objectivity" You can prove that arithmetic as a closed system is logically consistent, you can't prove that any particular application of such a system to the real world is objectively correct
3 replies 2 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @GhostMantis and
(Actually you CAN'T prove that arithmetic is consistent using arithmetic itself, that's Gödel's second incompleteness theorem, but we don't need to get into that) Whether 2+2=4 in real life is entirely dependent on how you count and measure the four things, whatever they are
5 replies 3 retweets 19 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @GhostMantis and
Whether the statement "2+2=4" is true depends on what you mean by the operation "+", what set the symbols "2" and "4" come from, and the definition of the equivalence relation "=" . It's covered in any Intro to Modern Math class, which these objectivists have clearly never taken
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @KJMDPhD @arthur_affect and
Hey there, guy. If you read my entire thread I clearly stated the importance of not dropping context. I stated that in the commonly understood, everyday context wherein these symbols are clearly defined, it is objectively true.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GhostMantis @arthur_affect and
But the original discussion that precipitated this "2+2=5" trolling wasn't set in the everyday context. It was among professional math educators and researchers discussing the role racism has played and continues to play in our profession.
1 reply 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @KJMDPhD @GhostMantis and
Like if context is so important to you, recognize this whole conversation is out of context at the start. Professional mathematicians were having a totally normal seminar series and online trolls decided to jump on it
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likes
I mean, the professional mathematician was obviously subtweeting ConceptualJames but James chose to leap at it like an excitable puppy with a tennis ball because that's who he and his followers are
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @GhostMantis and
Oh I'm referring to the origins of all this, which happened about a month ago. I don't want to be more specific because the participants were being harassed on here and with this new flare up they could be targeted again
0 replies 0 retweets 5 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.