Evidence for God from Science

Justhuman wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:
Concepts dude, concepts.

Concepts don't exist like gravity, they only exist within human thought. Are you suggesting math only exist in the context of human thought?

Hardly.
Math would exist regardless of there being ANY humans at all.
That is the point.

So again; where does math exist? Also, who found math, and where was it first found?

Math doesn't exist in neither a fundamental material or immateriual form. Math is knowledge and can only be brought into physical existence by intelligent beings.

When we say math we are speaking of mathematical concepts.
They exist in the same since that anything immaterial exists.
If there were no intelligent beings around, with 2 apples seize to be two apples? with 3 pairs of peaches seize to be 6 peaches?
Of course not.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Justhuman wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:
Concepts don't exist like gravity, they only exist within human thought. Are you suggesting math only exist in the context of human thought?

Hardly.
Math would exist regardless of there being ANY humans at all.
That is the point.

So again; where does math exist? Also, who found math, and where was it first found?

Math doesn't exist in neither a fundamental material or immateriual form. Math is knowledge and can only be brought into physical existence by intelligent beings.

When we say math we are speaking of mathematical concepts.
They exist in the same since that anything immaterial exists.
If there were no intelligent beings around, with 2 apples seize to be two apples? with 3 pairs of peaches seize to be 6 peaches?
Of course not.

True! But in order to apply math to the apples and peaches requires an intelligent being, because that math remains in the thoughts/imagination of said intelligent being. Without an intelligent being, there would be no math, all you would have is just a pile of fruit.

I think that you mean that without an intelligent being there would be no application of mathematics.

PaulSacramento wrote:I think that you mean that without an intelligent being there would be no application of mathematics.

Naw; I meant what I said. If I understand you correctly, you mean math exists by itself, but needs an intelligent being to apply it. Using the analogy of the combustion engine I mentioned earlier, that would be like saying before the engine was built, while it was just an idea, that it existed somewhere but just needed someone to operate the engine.
I say before the engine was built, it was just a part of someone’s thoughts, it never existed. And that math doesn’t exist, it is just a system that is a part of someone’s thoughts.

Ken

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:I think that you mean that without an intelligent being there would be no application of mathematics.

Naw; I meant what I said. If I understand you correctly, you mean math exists by itself, but needs an intelligent being to apply it. Using the analogy of the combustion engine I mentioned earlier, that would be like saying before the engine was built, while it was just an idea, that it existed somewhere but just needed someone to operate the engine.
I say before the engine was built, it was just a part of someone’s thoughts, it never existed. And that math doesn’t exist, it is just a system that is a part of someone’s thoughts.

Ken

You can't have it both ways Ken, you can't say math doesn't exist apart form someone's thoughts and say that 2 apples + 2 apples = 4 Apples even if there is no one around to count them.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:I think that you mean that without an intelligent being there would be no application of mathematics.

Naw; I meant what I said. If I understand you correctly, you mean math exists by itself, but needs an intelligent being to apply it. Using the analogy of the combustion engine I mentioned earlier, that would be like saying before the engine was built, while it was just an idea, that it existed somewhere but just needed someone to operate the engine.
I say before the engine was built, it was just a part of someone’s thoughts, it never existed. And that math doesn’t exist, it is just a system that is a part of someone’s thoughts.

Ken

You can't have it both ways Ken, you can't say math doesn't exist apart form someone's thoughts and say that 2 apples + 2 apples = 4 Apples even if there is no one around to count them.

Why? The way I see it, if there are no thoughts concerning math, math doesn't exist!

RickD wrote:

Justhuman wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:
Concepts don't exist like gravity, they only exist within human thought. Are you suggesting math only exist in the context of human thought?

Hardly.
Math would exist regardless of there being ANY humans at all.
That is the point.

So again; where does math exist? Also, who found math, and where was it first found?

Math doesn't exist in neither a fundamental material or immateriual form. Math is knowledge and can only be brought into physical existence by intelligent beings.

How can math be brought into physical existence?

Physical in the sense of neural processes in our brain, writing formulas on paper or typing on the computer.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Justhuman wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:
Concepts don't exist like gravity, they only exist within human thought. Are you suggesting math only exist in the context of human thought?

Hardly.
Math would exist regardless of there being ANY humans at all.
That is the point.

So again; where does math exist? Also, who found math, and where was it first found?

Math doesn't exist in neither a fundamental material or immateriual form. Math is knowledge and can only be brought into physical existence by intelligent beings.

When we say math we are speaking of mathematical concepts.
They exist in the same since that anything immaterial exists.
If there were no intelligent beings around, with 2 apples seize to be two apples? with 3 pairs of peaches seize to be 6 peaches?
Of course not.

Using the word 'immaterial' becomes confusing, for which immaterial 'level' is meant?
The 'spiritual immaterial' or the 'conceptual immaterial'? The spiritual immaterial (if it exists) would be real, the conceptual is imaginary. A formula like 1+1=10 is just a formula, it is a mere mathematical fact, nothing more. It doesn't exist in any realm.
Maybe that's the confusing in this. Maybe we mean the same, but are explaining/interpreting things differently?

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:I think that you mean that without an intelligent being there would be no application of mathematics.

Naw; I meant what I said. If I understand you correctly, you mean math exists by itself, but needs an intelligent being to apply it. Using the analogy of the combustion engine I mentioned earlier, that would be like saying before the engine was built, while it was just an idea, that it existed somewhere but just needed someone to operate the engine.
I say before the engine was built, it was just a part of someone’s thoughts, it never existed. And that math doesn’t exist, it is just a system that is a part of someone’s thoughts.

Ken

You can't have it both ways Ken, you can't say math doesn't exist apart form someone's thoughts and say that 2 apples + 2 apples = 4 Apples even if there is no one around to count them.

Why? The way I see it, if there are no thoughts concerning math, math doesn't exist!

I think you can see that 2+2=4 is math. So then, math does have a hold in reality even when people aren't around. The world infact, seems to work by and run on math. One big mathematical equation. Some even say reality is ultimately all math.

The "riddle" that must be resolved, which you and JustAtheist haven't answered or are avoiding, is how can math have any hold in the world without humans -- if for math to exist requires someone to have thunk it.

Now I can see what you two are trying to say and edge towards, but evidently PaulS, myself and perhaps some others aren't buying it -- aren't letting you guys off the hook that easily. More reasoning is required, because right now, there is no rationalised position being presented only declarative statements of beliefs which appear illogical to us e.g., like math didn't exist prior to human thought yet 1+1 still equalled 2 (math) prior to us.

More explanation is required, as I see, in order to make your statements non-contradictory and position sound. Right now, I see nothing presented your side that I can logically accept. It's like someone telling me they believe in round squares. Ok, great! But, how can I logically accept this? Please explain further.

It depends how one defines math(s). Is it purely the system people use to symbolize and calculate numbers and quantities of things in the world, or is it fundamentally a part of how things relate to each other (1 dog plus one dog makes 2 dogs) whether anyone's thinking about the numbers or not?

To add to the issue, perhaps confuse it further for some, let's frame the context of "math" in the context of our world.

Consider the physical laws we discover in our universe. Such can and are represented mathematically. They are fundamentally mathematical equations. So then, are physical laws real in/of themselves?

If math is purely a system that is conceived (as Kenny has said) [Premise 1], and we discover physical laws in our world that which are fundamentally mathematical equations [Premise 2], then it seems the conclusion reached is that Idealism is true - the nature of reality is fundamentally mental.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C5pq7W5yRM

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:I think that you mean that without an intelligent being there would be no application of mathematics.

Naw; I meant what I said. If I understand you correctly, you mean math exists by itself, but needs an intelligent being to apply it. Using the analogy of the combustion engine I mentioned earlier, that would be like saying before the engine was built, while it was just an idea, that it existed somewhere but just needed someone to operate the engine.
I say before the engine was built, it was just a part of someone’s thoughts, it never existed. And that math doesn’t exist, it is just a system that is a part of someone’s thoughts.

Ken

You can't have it both ways Ken, you can't say math doesn't exist apart form someone's thoughts and say that 2 apples + 2 apples = 4 Apples even if there is no one around to count them.

Why? The way I see it, if there are no thoughts concerning math, math doesn't exist!

And that is why you don't get it Ken.
YOU and your thoughts are NOT relevant to whether something IS or ISN'T.
You are not using logical reasoning.
You remind me of the time when people though that there was no such thing as black swans because no one ever saw them or the guy that says a tree falling in the forest doesn't make a sound if there is no one around to hear it.

Justhuman wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Justhuman wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:
Hardly.
Math would exist regardless of there being ANY humans at all.
That is the point.

So again; where does math exist? Also, who found math, and where was it first found?

Math doesn't exist in neither a fundamental material or immateriual form. Math is knowledge and can only be brought into physical existence by intelligent beings.

When we say math we are speaking of mathematical concepts.
They exist in the same since that anything immaterial exists.
If there were no intelligent beings around, with 2 apples seize to be two apples? with 3 pairs of peaches seize to be 6 peaches?
Of course not.

Using the word 'immaterial' becomes confusing, for which immaterial 'level' is meant?
The 'spiritual immaterial' or the 'conceptual immaterial'? The spiritual immaterial (if it exists) would be real, the conceptual is imaginary. A formula like 1+1=10 is just a formula, it is a mere mathematical fact, nothing more. It doesn't exist in any realm.
Maybe that's the confusing in this. Maybe we mean the same, but are explaining/interpreting things differently?

You and Ken seem to be under the impression that things only exist if humans are around to "see" them.
Mathematical concepts were not created, they were discovered.
AXB/A+B isn't right because someone created the formula and made it right, it is right because someone discovered that it works.
2x3=6 isn't correct because someone said it was, it is correct because 2 sets of 3 equals 6 pieces in total.

These things would be exactly what they are regardless of there being anyone around to use them.

A 3 side thing would have the essence of triangularity, even if there were no 3 sides things anymore or no humans to observes them.

You two seem to be implying that until humans were able to reason that 1+1 = 2 that, somehow, it didn't.

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:I think that you mean that without an intelligent being there would be no application of mathematics.

Naw; I meant what I said. If I understand you correctly, you mean math exists by itself, but needs an intelligent being to apply it. Using the analogy of the combustion engine I mentioned earlier, that would be like saying before the engine was built, while it was just an idea, that it existed somewhere but just needed someone to operate the engine.
I say before the engine was built, it was just a part of someone’s thoughts, it never existed. And that math doesn’t exist, it is just a system that is a part of someone’s thoughts.

Ken

You can't have it both ways Ken, you can't say math doesn't exist apart form someone's thoughts and say that 2 apples + 2 apples = 4 Apples even if there is no one around to count them.

Why? The way I see it, if there are no thoughts concerning math, math doesn't exist!

Kurieuo wrote: I think you can see that 2+2=4 is math.

Not quite; it’s an example of a mathematical equation. Math is just a system.

Kurieuo wrote: So then, math does have a hold in reality even when people aren't around.

No; people use math and various other systems, and it is people who have this hold in reality.

Kurieuo wrote: The world infact, seems to work by and run on math. One big mathematical equation. Some even say reality is ultimately all math.

People use math to run the world.

Kurieuo wrote: The "riddle" that must be resolved, which you and JustAtheist haven't answered or are avoiding, is how can math have any hold in the world without humans -- if for math to exist requires someone to have thunk it.

I thought I answered that “riddle” with the engine analogy. Apparently that answer wasn’t to your satisfaction, so let me try something else. Here is how I see it:
The system of math does not have any type of hold on the world; humans or not. Humans have hold of the world, and they USE math to get things done. If there were no humans or any other type of intelligent beings, there would be no one around to use math this way.
Is this answer to your satisfaction? If so, perhaps you can answer a question that you’ve neglected to answer: If math has an existence outside of human thought, where does it exist?

Ken

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:I think that you mean that without an intelligent being there would be no application of mathematics.

Naw; I meant what I said. If I understand you correctly, you mean math exists by itself, but needs an intelligent being to apply it. Using the analogy of the combustion engine I mentioned earlier, that would be like saying before the engine was built, while it was just an idea, that it existed somewhere but just needed someone to operate the engine.
I say before the engine was built, it was just a part of someone’s thoughts, it never existed. And that math doesn’t exist, it is just a system that is a part of someone’s thoughts.

Ken

You can't have it both ways Ken, you can't say math doesn't exist apart form someone's thoughts and say that 2 apples + 2 apples = 4 Apples even if there is no one around to count them.

Why? The way I see it, if there are no thoughts concerning math, math doesn't exist!

And that is why you don't get it Ken.
YOU and your thoughts are NOT relevant to whether something IS or ISN'T.
You are not using logical reasoning.
You remind me of the time when people though that there was no such thing as black swans because no one ever saw them or the guy that says a tree falling in the forest doesn't make a sound if there is no one around to hear it.

My claim isn’t that MY thoughts are necessary for math, but that HUMAN or some type of intelligent being’s thoughts are necessary. As far as your analogy, black swans, trees, etc. have a physical existence. IOW we now know where they exist. Can you give such an answer about math?