|
Roach, i'm not saying that proofs aren't problematic, i'm saying that they are. My position is there is no one true way of making sense of the world.
I agree that it's all in the axioms. Arguing against scientific ideas based on the supernatural assumptions, and vice versa, is like arguing against euclidean geometry based on the assumptions of noneuclidean geometry; both are valid ways to think about abstract things, they just have different, mutually exclusive axioms and different spheres of relevance. Granted, there don't seem to be many outspoken militant ideologues when it comes to mathematics, as far as i can tell, no one has been drowned for proving the existence of irrational numbers lately.
|