From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!yale.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!brunix!cgy Mon Dec  9 10:48:54 EST 1991
Article 1952 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca rec.arts.books:11312 sci.philosophy.tech:1338 comp.ai.philosophy:1952
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!yale.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!brunix!cgy
>From: cgy@cs.brown.edu (Curtis Yarvin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Existence
Message-ID: <95525@brunix.UUCP>
Date: 8 Dec 91 14:15:07 GMT
References: <1991Dec7.070815.6257@husc3.harvard.edu> <1991Dec7.190338.2203@Princeton.EDU> <JMC.91Dec7230031@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: news@brunix.UUCP
Distribution: world,local
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Lines: 29

In article <JMC.91Dec7230031@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>
>It is presumptuous and narcissistic to declare a question meaningless just
>because you have no way of answering it conclusively.  This holds true both
>for questions about the material world and for purely mathematical questions.

I agree; but Skaggs was referring to what I consider merely a semantic
question, "Does pi exist?"  The question is applying the predicate of
"existence" to an object on which it is not well-defined; i.e., I doubt you
could find two people on any of these newsgroups who would agree what it
would mean for pi to exist, or what it would mean for pi not to exist.

If you give a clear definition of "exist" over the domain of mathematical
objects as you state the question, it becomes meaningful.

Otherwise, nobody else is really sure what you're talking about, so they all
come up with their own personal definitions, and have a nice
philosophy-style argument.  He who first propounds a theory so obfuscated
that none of the rest can understand it, as always, wins.  The prize is
grant money and academic prestige; the game is unstable, as the former
brings your enemies grovelling to your toes so they can get a piece of Uncle
Sam's Tit, and the latter brings them to think you so brilliant that they
don't bother even trying to deobfuscate your pronouncements.  In this,
philosophy has much in common with the classic frat-house sport of
"quarters," although the latter sheds rather more light on the true nature
of consciousness, proving at least that whatever this elusive beast may be,
it is certainly no boolean quantity.

c


