[Date Index] [Thread Index] [FOM Postings] [FOM Home]

*To*: jmyciel@euclid.colorado.edu*Subject*: Re: FOM: Re: fom-digest V1 #245*From*: kanovei@wmwap1.math.uni-wuppertal.de (Kanovei)*Date*: Sat, 11 Dec 99 05:46:15 +0100*Cc*: fom@math.psu.edu, kanovei@math.psu.edu*Sender*: owner-fom@math.psu.edu

Jan Mycielski of Fri, 10 Dec 1999 19:45:16 -0700 (MST): But some philsophers like such biased terminologies and they support their pet theories and fuels empty disputations. For example they say: A realist is a person who takes mathematical objects to be real. False! A realist is a person who can distinguish imaginary from real. ---------- "They" in the 3rd line clearly refers to philosophers in the 1st line. But, I am pretty sure any (educated) philosopher would know that a realist (philosophically) is anybody who accepts the independent existence of universalia, and in that sense a realist is just *a person who takes mathematical objects to be real*. This has little to do with a common meaning of this word e.g. as a person seeing the reality as it stands. Vladimir Kanovei

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [FOM Postings] [FOM Home]