Science and Realism

[Knotted]

I'm curious about your use of the word 'accidental' at the end there . .

I just mean the way the universe happens to be.

 

[Knotted]

Quick question for gurrier on philosophy of maths:

I don't mean to criticise or start a debate, but where do you get the idea that set theory is derived from the way the universe is?

Its just that I've never seen that idea before, and yet it looks like it should exist somewhere in the history of ideas. Neo-kantian logicism or something?

 

[8ball]

I thought he just meant this kind of Universe:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe_(mathematics)

 

[Knotted]

I thought he just meant this kind of Universe:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe_(mathematics)

Sorry I'm being dozy. Ignore me.

In fact ignore everything I've said on philosophy of maths in this thread. For some reason I can't think about it and read at the same time. I should donate my brain to neuroscience.

 

[Demosthenes]

As an attempt to get to the core of realism in an inoffensive way: there are real and enduring structures in reality which explain the success of science.

I reckon that's fair enough, I think, as a definition of realism.

And Im not even certain whether I disagree with it or not.

But it's also true that there are real and enduring aspects of reality which science can't explain, and from an idealist perspective, that's possibly more important, as arguably without any minds there wouldn't be any reality.

Not that I'm sure I approve of berkeleian idealism, - I'm more thinking of the interdependence of mind and world, whatever that means, I guess.