Do Mathematical Truths Depend on the Existence of Mathematical Objects?

  • Thread starter Thread starter poverlord
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ontology Theories
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the nature of mathematical truths and their existence. It raises the question of whether mathematical objects truly exist, as this impacts the validity of mathematical statements. The conversation highlights that established theories of truth in science rely on the correspondence of statements to the real world, creating a dilemma if mathematical entities are deemed non-existent. Additionally, it emphasizes that mathematical statements often take the form of conditional structures, focusing on relationships rather than specific content. This suggests that the truth of mathematical statements can be independent of the actual existence of the elements involved, framing mathematics as a system of templates rather than a direct reflection of reality.
poverlord
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hey guys, I have been thinking about the problem of mathematical truths. We simply do not know if the things that mathematics deals with really exist or not, yet people still believe that its statements are true and indubitable. Unfortunately, the only truly well-respected theory of truth in the sciences requires some notion of sentences "corresponding" to the real world. If it turns out that mathematical "objects" don't exist then what can we say about mathematical truths. In short, how can we say true things about stuff that does not exist?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The concept of a 'mathematical truth' ,like any other concept, is generated by billions of interconnected neurons in the brain that are physical, and follow laws of physics, and chemistry. So in a sense, a 'mathematical truth' is encoded in a physical medium which allowed it to be so.
 
poverlord said:
Hey guys, I have been thinking about the problem of mathematical truths. We simply do not know if the things that mathematics deals with really exist or not, yet people still believe that its statements are true and indubitable. Unfortunately, the only truly well-respected theory of truth in the sciences requires some notion of sentences "corresponding" to the real world. If it turns out that mathematical "objects" don't exist then what can we say about mathematical truths. In short, how can we say true things about stuff that does not exist?
All mathematical statements are of the form "If ... then ..." (even if the "if" part is not explicitely stated). That is, mathematics is about "structure", not "content". Think of mathematics as "templates" where you enter the specific content into the "blanks".

It is true, from the meanings of the words "or" and "if ... then", that "if a is true, then "a or b is true", is a true statement. The "content"- what "a" and "b" mean and whether a is true or not, is not part of that statement and the truth of the statement does not depend on the truth of a and b separately.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
510
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
98
Views
3K
  • · Replies 136 ·
5
Replies
136
Views
24K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 137 ·
5
Replies
137
Views
28K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 148 ·
5
Replies
148
Views
19K