You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

mjgeddes comments on What do professional philosophers believe, and why? - Less Wrong Discussion

31 Post author: RobbBB 01 May 2013 02:40PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (249)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 05 May 2013 05:20:51AM *  -1 points [-]

This isn't modern Platonism.

Ok, then its Geddesian Platonism ;) The easiest solution is to do away with the concrete dynamic objects as anything fundamental and just regard reality as a timeless Platonia . I thought thats more or less what Julian Barbour suggests.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonia_(philosophy)

A program is an abstract object. Particular copies of a program stored in your hard drive, are concrete.

The actual timeless (abstract) math objects are the mathematical relations making up the algorithm in question. But the particular model or representation of a program stored on a computer can be regarded as a concrete math object. And an instantiated (running) program can be viewed as a concrete math object also ( a dynamical system with input, processing and output).

These analogies are exact:

Space is to physics as categories are to math

Time is to physics as dynamical systems (running programs) are to math

Matter is to physics as data models are to math