Comment

Comment by doone on March 29, 2012 at 2:40pm

MORALITY AND MATHEMATICS: CAN YOU BE A MORAL ANTIREALIST AND A MATHEMATICAL REALIST?

Justin Clarke-Doane in Ethics (via the NYT):

It is commonly suggested that evolutionary considerations generate an epistemological challenge for moral realism. At first approximation, the challenge for the moral realist is to explain our having many true moral beliefs, given that those beliefs are the products of evolutionary forces that would be indifferent to the moral truth. An important question surrounding this challenge is the extent to which it generalizes. In particular, it is of interest whether the Evolutionary Challenge for moral realism is equally a challenge for mathematical realism. It is widely thought not to be. For example, Richard Joyce, one of the most prominent advocates of the Evolutionary Challenge, goes so far as to write, “the dialectic within which I am working here assumes that if an argument that moral beliefs are unjustified or false would by the same logic show that believing that 1 + 1 = 2 is unjustified or false, this would count as a reductio ad absurdum.”1 He assures the reader, “There is … evidence that the distinct genealogy of [mathematical] beliefs can be pushed right back into evolutionary history. Would the fact that we have such a genealogical explanation of … ‘1 + 1 = 2’ serve to demonstrate that we are unjustified in holding it? Surely not, for we have no grasp of how this belief might have enhanced reproductive fitness independent of assuming its truth.”2 Similarly, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong writes, “The evolutionary explanations [of our having the moral beliefs that we have] work even if there are no moral facts at all. The same point could not be made about mathematical beliefs. People evolved to believe that 2 + 3 = 5, because they would not have survived if they had believed that 2 + 3 = 4, but the reason why they would not have survived then is that it is true that 2 + 3 = 5.”3 Finally, Roger Crisp writes, “In the case of mathematics, what is central is the contrast between practices or beliefs which develop because that is the way things are, and those that do not. The calculating rules developed as they did because [they] reflect mathematical truth. The functions of … morality, however, are to be understood in terms of well-being, and there seems no reason to think that had human nature involved, say, different motivations then different practices would not have emerged.”4

In this article, I argue that such sentiments are mistaken. I argue that the Evolutionary Challenge for moral realism is equally a challenge for mathematical realism.

Posted by Robin Varghese at 09:29 AM | Permalink 

Comment by doone on March 28, 2012 at 5:55pm

The Mathematics of Happiness?

JASON GOTS

Chip Conley's "emotional equations," simple formulas like "anxiety = uncertainty x powerlessness", are designed to help individuals and businesses achieve real fulfillment, not just material success. . . . READ »

Comment by doone on March 28, 2012 at 3:15pm

Divide By Zero, You’ll Be Just Fine

Mar. 27, 2012

Comment by doone on March 28, 2012 at 6:32am

What Type of Math Class Is This?

Mar. 28, 2012

Comment by Michel on March 18, 2012 at 10:43am

@A - I think life is messy enough without adding to it with planned irregularity - the current calendar is a fine example. It's the 21st century! Let's move to metric time while we're at it =)

Comment by Neal on March 18, 2012 at 10:19am

What if it was always on a Saturday? =)

Actually doesn't effect me in any manner since once you're retired it doesn't matter what the day or date is.

Comment by Adriana on March 18, 2012 at 10:06am

I don't like that idea. What if my birthday was always on a Monday? :-P

I like a little variation in the calendar. I'm not a big fan of too much regularity.

Comment by Neal on March 18, 2012 at 10:02am

I like that idea.

Comment by doone on March 17, 2012 at 10:46pm

Mathematics Makes an Eternal Calendar

Big Think Editors on December 28, 2011, 2:00 PM

What's the Latest Development?

Using computer programs and mathematical formulas, an astrophysicist and an economist have created a calendar in which each new 12-month period is identical to the one which came before, and remains that way from one year to the next in perpetuity. Dubbed the Hanke-Henry Permanent Calendar, holidays and birthdays would always fall on the same day of the week. One necessary change in making the calendar was redistributing days across the 12 months. September and June, for example, would each have 31 days.

What's the Big Idea?

Having an unchanging calendar would produce some noteworthy benefits. The convenience of having every birthday and every work holiday fall on the same day of every year would simply planning but there are also substantial economic benefits. "Business meetings, sports schedules and school calendars would be identical every year. Today's cacophony of time zones, daylight savings times and calendar fluctuations, year after year, would be over. The economy—that's all of us—would receive a permanent 'harmonization' dividend."

Photo credit: shutterstock.com

Comment by doone on March 16, 2012 at 7:58am

Meta Venn Diagram

Mar. 13, 2012

A simple Venn diagram that describes how Venn diagrams work

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 17
• 18
• 19
• 20
• 21
• …
• 33
• Next ›
• Page