#philosophy

This thread is to show that math is overhyped. Of course, such a hot take requires a disclaimer, so here it is.

Disclaimer. According to Mamardashvili and Pyatigorsky's Symbol and Consciousness, a symbol is something that produces a complex concept in your mind that is not contained in the bare object underlying the symbol. For instance, a dove is a symbol of peace—a complex concept—which is by no means contained in the bird itself, but is somehow sparked in one's mind upon seeing a dove or its image. In this way, a "symbol" consists of three components: the raw object that symbolizes, the complex concept that is symbolized, and the link between the two.

The tendency with symbols is that most people are interested in the symbolized concept rather than the raw object underlying it: people dispute about peace, whereas doves are only of interest to a small group of ornithologists.

The same is true about math. There is the "raw object" of math—such as all the math papers in the world—which is only of interest to a small group of mathematicians who pursue math as their main occupation in life. Then, there is the complex concept that is sparked in the minds of laypeople when they hear the word "math."

This post is a critique of the latter.

~

Thought of the day. When I read the Ancient Greeks, I am filled with admiration. Euclid, Democritus, Epicurus, Plato, and Aristotle were all remarkable thinkers. And yet in my experience, modern people love to poke fun at the ancient Greeks, Plato and Aristotle in particular. It seems that people consider scholastic philosophy impotent, especially compared to modern Science. In particular, people believe that Plato and Aristotle were "armchair" thinkers/rationalists who never looked at the outside world, and so aren't worth engaging with.

But this perspective is untrue. I don't want to fixate on this point, but I will briefly try and make it. I will start with Aristotle, who made extensive biological observations. He systemized Marine Biology. In fact, he was practically the founder of zoology. Darwin himself said his "two gods" were Linnaeus and Cuvier, but they were "mere school-boys to old Aristotle". As far as physics, it is considerably more complicated. However, first think of the common refrain: "Aristotle thought heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects!" This is obviously wrong, right?