(urth) barrington interview

[Dan'l Danehy-Oakes]

Antonio - I think that *that* is the genetic fallacy. You are discarding
the evidence of the crow because of where it comes from.

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:38 AM, António Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com>
wrote:

> The point is that no one knows how the crow does his math. The crow may
> look at it in a way similar to our addition and subtraction, or in a
> different enough way. Again, what we're questioning is not the universal
> applicability of our math, rather its universality as a computing tool.
>
> No dia 08/10/2014, às 16:07, "Norwood, Frederick Hudson" <
> NORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> escreveu:
>
> > Actually, crows can do simple math.  If four hunters enter a house and
> three come out, the crow can do enough math to avoid the house.  Four
> hunters in, four come out, the crow flies to the house.  Twenty hunters in,
> nineteen out, the crow flies to the house.  The crow can see the difference
> between three and four but not between nineteen and twenty.
> >
> > I do not believe there is an alien race for which four (the concept, not
> the symbol) is less than three.
> >
> > For a good science fiction story on this subject, read "Omnilingual" by
> H. Beam Piper.
> >
> > Rick Norwood
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Lee
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 10:57 AM
> > To: urth at urth.net
> > Subject: (urth) barrington interview
> >
> >> Thomas Bitterman: Is there an argument against the universality of
> mathematics
> >
> >> that isn't  just the Genetic Fallacy?
> >
> >
> > By Genetic Fallacy I assume you mean this:
> >
> >> The genetic fallacy, also known as fallacy of origins, fallacy of
> virtue,[1]
> >
> >> Is a fallacy of irrelevance where a conclusion is suggested based
> solely on
> >
> >> something or someone's origin rather than its current meaning or context
> >
> >
> > My objection to the assumption that math is universally applicable is
> because
> >
> > math originates from the mind of one species on one planet in a very
> small
> >
> > corner of one galaxy in a universe of a (perhaps) infinite number of
> galaxies.
> >
> >
> > As I understand it, the Genetic Fallacy would apply if math had been
> found outside
> >
> > that original context. For example, if we found math being used by
> members of
> >
> > another species from outside our solar system or galaxy. Or if we had
> travelled
> >
> > to all corners of the universe and found math applicable everywhere, not
> just
> >
> > from the perspective of planet earth.
> >
> >
> > But currently (as far as I know) math is used only by that one species
> on that
> >
> > one planet.
> >
> >
> > I wouldn't claim it is impossible for math to be universal. I would only
> say that it
> >
> > seems unlikely to me. The fact that everything we encounter can be
> described
> >
> > mathematically seems most likely due to human limitations on what we are
> able
> >
> > to encounter.
> >
> >
> > In other words, we simply can't see what we can't see.  The assumption
> of a cosmic
> >
> > universality to our mammalian-evolved perceptions and thoughts seems
> unfounded
> >
> > to me.
> >
> >
> > Of course, if we are talking Special Creation and math as a special
> mastery for
> >
> > understanding the universe, as bestowed upon us by God, then that's a
> different story.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Urth Mailing List
> > To post, write urth at urth.net
> > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
> > _______________________________________________
> > Urth Mailing List
> > To post, write urth at urth.net
> > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>



-- 
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20141008/210e526d/attachment-0002.htm>