Plato claimed that non-material abstract Forms (like Beauty, Justice) are more real than physical

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

Yall are assuming that human interpertation is correct. We can't see or hear things beyond a certain spectrum, which we could be lacking critical information to consider. Just doing the best we can is enough, but will never be perfect even with machines.

No one claims that human perception is omniscient. You don't need to see X-rays to know what a rock is. Perfection isn't required, the only thing that's required is grasping reality to the possible extent. And machines just extend the same principle of perception processed by logic. You don't need to know everything to know something

 

[Divine Power]

Mathematical truths are not knowledge about the world. They are truths about the rules of a conceptual system. "2 + 2 = 4" is valid because we define "2", "+", and "=" that way. That's not a discovery about reality, that's a tautology grounded in how we structured the terms.
When you apply math to reality, like in budgeting or engineering, then it becomes knowledge. Until then, it is like chess. Internally valid, but empty of content without referents.

Mathematics underpins much of our understanding of the physical world, physics, engineering, computer science all rely heavily on math.
That's enough for today, bruh

 

[The Last Stand]

“2 + 2 = 4” is known to be true through logical reasoning and definitions within mathematics, not through direct observation or experiment in the physical world.

But I can physically prove that "2 + 2 = 4."

Example: I place two coins on a table. You counted two. Now I place two more coins on the same table. That makes four coins.

 

[Divine Power]

But I can physically prove that "2 + 2 = 4."

Example: I place two coins on a table. You counted two. Now I place two more coins on the same table. That makes four coins.

You're demonstrating that reality conforms to the mathematical truth, not that the mathematical truth depends on reality.

 

[PonderosaPete]

Are names real?

 

[The Last Stand]

You're demonstrating that reality conforms to the mathematical truth, not that the mathematical truth depends on reality.

What do you mean "conform?" You did an example of 2 + 2 = 4 as fact that could not be physically proven. I stated with my example that it could.

I saw a long-ass equation that showed that 1+1=2 or something like that. If I could find it...



This is what you're doing, needlessly overcomplicating a simple concept.

 

[Πλάτωνας]

Ποτέ δεν θα είσαι πραγματικός φιλόσοφος. Δεν έχεις μυαλό, δεν έχεις επιχειρήματα, δεν έχεις κριτική σκέψη. Είσαι ένας αράπης διαστρεβλωμένος από το σπήλαιο σε μία ατελή προσομοίωση της τελειότητας του κόσμου των ιδεών.

 

[Divine Power]

What do you mean "conform?" You did an example of 2 + 2 = 4 as fact that could not be physically proven. I stated with my example that it could.

I saw a long-ass equation that showed that 1+1=2 or something like that. If I could find it...

View attachment 7449060

This is what you're doing, needlessly overcomplicating a simple concept.

What you're doing is illustrating a mathematical truth using physical objects. The coins behave in a way that aligns with the abstract rule. That’s what I meant by “conform”: the real world follows or reflects the logic of math.

 

[The Last Stand]

What you're doing is illustrating a mathematical truth using physical objects. The coins behave in a way that aligns with the abstract rule. That’s what I meant by “conform”: the real world follows or reflects the logic of math.

But what are you proving exactly with this thread? That's where I'm still lost on.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

What you're doing is illustrating a mathematical truth using physical objects. The coins behave in a way that aligns with the abstract rule. That’s what I meant by “conform”: the real world follows or reflects the logic of math.

What?
Math is constructed to describe the regularities that we observe in the real world. Like every valid abstraction, it is a concept that conforms to reality, not the other way around. If the coins didn't behave as we expected, then we'd revise the model.
Again: Abstractions are only valid when they are shaped by reality.

Think of how numbers originate. You perceive one apple, then another. You integrate them and form the concept "2". Math begins with perceptual units. All of arithmetic reduces to repeated abstractions from counted concretes. Without first seeing and distinguishing objects, "2" has no meaning.

 

[The Last Stand]

Without first seeing and distinguishing objects, "2" has no meaning.

"2" could mean a number of things, no pun intended. Two, meaning the count of two objects. DEFCON 2, meaning a state of "red alert" as the DEFCON is measured by severity by five levels of descending order. Two, being a second item in a list if listed with numerals. Context matters.

 

[Foghotten]

Plato made a claim, alright.
Let's see the evidence for it.
Without evidence, the claim is arbitrary and can should must be dismissed for lack of cognitive content.

>What if our perception of things hide a deeper view of reality? Wouldn't it be interesting to-


<SOOOOURCE?

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

>What if our perception of things hide a deeper view of reality? Wouldn't it be interesting to-

View attachment 7449124
<SOOOOURCE?

You're absolutely right. What if this bottle of soy hides the Form of Nourishment? What if your socks conceal the deeper metaphysical truth of Bipedal Fabric Duality?
What if every door you open is merely an echo of the transcendent Portalness your soul once glimpsed in the Realm of Being?
The SOOOOURCE? You already saw it before birth. You just forgot. Close your eyes and recollect.

 

[The Last Stand]

>What if our perception of things hide a deeper view of reality? Wouldn't it be interesting to-

View attachment 7449124
<SOOOOURCE?

I don't get it.

the real world follows or reflects the logic of math.

Math is universal, meaning it can be irrefutably proven. Well, unless you're using statistics, then you could argue that your data is manipulated for whatever purpose you're trying to serve it.

 

[Divine Power]

I don't get it.


Math is universal, meaning it can be irrefutably proven. Well, unless you're using statistics, then you could argue that your data is manipulated for whatever purpose you're trying to serve it.

You're absolutely right. What if this bottle of soy hides the Form of Nourishment? What if your socks conceal the deeper metaphysical truth of Bipedal Fabric Duality?
What if every door you open is merely an echo of the transcendent Portalness your soul once glimpsed in the Realm of Being?
The SOOOOURCE? You already saw it before birth. You just forgot. Close your eyes and recollect.

Both of you attacking me at once? What is this, some weird couple’s hobby?

 

[The Last Stand]

Why you are both attacking at the same time? Married?

He's not in my preferred age or sex demographic.

 

[finallyfalling]

Well I think Plato's wrong

 

[umseriously]

Hmmm, looking at it from the perspective of a layman, it can be considered to be true in some sense. If the afterlife is presumed to be real, one day everything physical will vanish and we will be left with more truer forms closer to what we imagine in our minds. A closer realization of the ideas that exist in our psyche. What exists now is only a approximation to it.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Plato:
<flexes>
Argue with that, nerd

 

[Crex Crex]

Plato was a stupid hack who got defeated by a bum holding a dead chicken.