Do abstract things exist mind-independently?

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Abstract things are things which cannot be seen or touched, and don’t take up space. We can talk about them, think about them and can represent them. For example, abstract things like mathematics, logic, and morality.

Most people will agree that mathematical objects, which are abstract, exist mind-independently, or that their existence doesn’t depend on our minds. The question is: do they actually exist mind-independently? If yes, how do mathematical objects exist mind-independently, considering it is very likely no Platonic realm exists?

2

The mind presents the world and its logical rules for sense-making only in a way the brain can afford or ‘put up’. Yes, in any universe, a triangle will have three sides if by triangular you mean ‘three sided’. But that’s a tautology. We’re merely saying that something we brained creatures perceive and call a triangle is a certain way and that whenever a triangle is, it is that way. Or that whenever there is a bachelor, he’s unmarried. But these do exist, certainly. There are triangles and bachelors everywhere. They gotta exist independently of my mind. I don’t know wtf is going on.

How can an eternally changing blob of somethingness ever produce an eternal fact, such as ‘all triangles have three sides’? Or do we mean simply that if triangles gotta be, they gotta be three-fuckin-sided or no deal?

3

Triangles seems like tangible what about √-1, infinite sets, vectors, and many other mathematical things. Do they exist mind independently or they are just shared imagination of our mind and they don’t exist in outside reality?

4

Nothing is independent of mind. And how weird we talk about abstract objects when we’re basically just generalizing a statistic of a sample (example) into the parameter of a population (category). No statistic, no sample, no parameter, without a population…? Then you always have all of the above, at least in essence (from your limited perspective) — at at least one time t. UNLESS, of course, the category is empty at every time t.

5

Damn I wish you were nicer to your mom & I was younger.

6

So, the “amount” of trees won’t exist if all minds die?

1 Like
7

There is no “whole” without mind, and thus no examples within (or without) it.

8

.

¿..and that she/Ich-twat hadn’t ruined his life and livelihood even more, more like. :smirking_face:

Talk about obtuse.

9

See there? MagsJ has been paying attention. Now keep in mind that we can’t be sure the cigarette smoking during pregnancy contributed to the leg issue, so we can’t indict her for that particular problem i was born with. But do we need to to ask why a moms is smoking during pregnancy in the first place?

Ultimately, it was the old man’s fault for involving himself with her at all. She was young and hot, and he didn’t know she would turn out to be a total clown unfit for anything but menial labor… forget about mothering a child. I could mother a child better and more responsibly than she ever could, and I wouldn’t let a baby promethean anywhere near that basketcase.

At best, we can say that she acted as a set of hands to pass her third of grandpa’s inheritance on to me when and if i do get to sell this house. Oh, one time she did co-sign for me when i bought a used truck in 98. She got mother of the year award for that, and they even featured her in an article about mothers that bend over backward to provide for their childrens.

Other than that, she’s only ever been a place i skipped in and out of through my twenties and paid utilities every time, bought my own food, etc. She hasn’t ‘provided for me’ since i was like 8 when the old man got custody.

So when grandpa died, i was on the yard. So, she bought a three bedroom house banking on me being there because nobody’s gonna fuckin rent to me when i get out. Her plan was to get me to be the nanny and do all the work in the house while she played candy crush, hit the vape, and waited to die. It meant she would have gotten over $100,000, bought a house with it she didn’t need, took a reverse mortage out on it (so I’ll never get it), and then used me to manage the place (that i may never get to sell) and herself as she sat and destroyed herself with her lifestyle. She wanted to stay out of the rest-homes and knew she couldn’t afford a nanny. That’s when the lightbulb appeared above her head. I can use my son.

In the end, there will have been three men that carried the catlady through her entire life. The old man, grandpa, and then me, while she contributed nothing substantial to any of em.

Just say it out loud it sounds so bad: dude gets out of prison for crimes he didn’t commit and then spends the rest of his ruined life in complete social isolation cleaning up after a wretched piece of crap who, if ever needs to go to a home for medical reasons or anything, will lose this house to the bank and he won’t get to sell it.

Fate didn’t want to do it differently. Me and her end up getting along, i have my own place and am making bank, and i can afford a visiting angel deal to go there three times a week for a couple hours to do shit. That’s an alternate reality that never happened, that was made impossible by the actions of the State.

10

.
I had meant that other female [see edited post].. :backhand_index_pointing_down:t3:

..as for your mother.. arguing with our parents, our mother especially, is a fruitless endeavour due to the fact that they gave birth to us and so they use this as leverage to always have the monopoly over us and all arguments.

A lot of parents make shit decisions that ruin their child’s/childrens’ lives, on a varying scale of severity, of course.. so I cannot say whether your mother hasn’t also “..ruined his/your life and livelihood even more..”

11

Oh.

Well.

In any case, i am the thing that shouldn’t have been… the product of the unholy union of two knuckleheads!

1 Like
12

TLDR

roflmao

abc 123

13

because of your mouth

14

Fuck off and stop sending me gift cards in the mail. I threw that shit in the trash.

1 Like
15

Until you learn how to control your tongue, you will feel like everything is just fate trying to break you… and completely miss how many opportunities (blessings) it gave you to break yourself.

That was my entire Christmas work bonus I regifted you, asshole. :wink:

You fuck off first.

16

So this is the classic; “Can I think it into existence”?

From our normal perception you cannot fathom something inanimate into existing from thin air.

Yet you can create what is called “Thinking” something into existence, often termed manifestation or the Law of Attraction, the philosophical idea that focused thoughts, beliefs, and intentions can shape reality and bring desired outcomes into existing.

This thus suggests that the mind influences lived experiences, often by changing perceptions, realities, behaviors, and choices. Forming what is thought of as matter transfiguration and thusly formed into what was thought of.

This is great for the open minded philosopher. To see what true forms of mathematics come to life out of just visualizing it first.

True magic.

17

Conscious, lingering spirits or merely, residual energy is inherently independent of mind. While many paranormal theories and stories describe ghosts as having awareness, emotions, and the ability to interact with the living, they lack the physical brain traditionally required for thought of therefore. So they imagine.

Creating unwavering ideas until they’ve bled the system dry of any future contingency. Yet where would we be if we never believed in our own ideas? Lost in the stone age I suspect. Banging a stick against a rock until a much greater force showed up and taught me how to make fire.

  1. Analog Perception: refers to the continuous, non-discrete, and direct, unprocessed sensing of environmental stimuli by biological systems. Unlike digital, segmented, or symbolic representations, this form of perception mirrors the physical characteristics of the world, offering a rich, subtle understanding of ecological shifts, magnitudes (e.g., luminance, distance), and continuous motion.
  2. Selective Perception: Focusing on certain stimuli while ignoring others.
  3. Bottom-Up-Processing: Builds perception from raw sensory data excess.

We take from this our sensory cannot be trusted.

  1. Total Sensory Experience: Phenomenological approaches, such as Merleau-Ponty’s, suggest looking at experience as a whole rather than separating it into individual senses (visual, tactile).
  2. Naïve Realism: The view that conscious, sensory experience provides direct, immediate contact with the real world.
  3. Subjective vs. Objective: (And yes indeed we still use this science today): Galileo argued that sensory qualities (colors, sounds) do not exist without a perceiver, challenging the idea that they are inherent in objects.

Again proven to be distrusted and not of any validation to points we’re trying to achieve. We’re trying to see if what you form in the mind is separate of the perceptions we control yet still exist in reality as tangible (i.e. Mathematics, Spirit).

  1. Idealism (Berkeley): George Berkeley argued that there are no material substances, only mental substances (minds) and ideas. In this view, “tangible” objects are actually just collections of ideas, idealistic faculties perceived by the mind. Nothing material then doesn’t exists separate of mind.
  2. Logic and Math: Mathematical truths are not tangible, yet they are considered proofs. They are deduced through logic, showing that truths exist outside of physical interaction.
  3. Not Just Tangible Evidence: In philosophy, “proof” often means a logical, well-supported argument or justification rather than a physical object.
  4. Limitations: This view can be limited, as many things (e.g., mathematical concepts, emotions, or the validity of senses themselves) are not inherently tangible.
Viewpoint Definition of Proof Focus
Empiricism Tangible, measurable evidence. Physical world.
Rationalism Logical consistency, mathematical proof. Mind and reason.
Idealism Mental perception and ideas. Consciousness.
Pragmatism Utility and practical results. What works.

Thus we’re stuck here. And have been ever since.

So unless you’ve got a new Viewpoint with a defined proof and formidable focus I raise you all-in.

18

mishmash offload:

19

A tree exists if there are no minds*. But the tree is unseen. Minds are required to see the tree.

The word “tree” exists only in English minds, and the mathematics of the tree exists only in the minds of those taught the mathematics.

The universe provides an infinite supply of minds. In order for the tree to be seen, its just a matter of getting the tree within the non-occluded field of any given mind.

*Sort of. If there were 0 minds then time would move infinitely fast and all life in the universe including trees would long be extinct.

1 Like
20

There had to be a communion of minds in order for there to even be a tree. It’s in the “communication” of DNA…& literally everything else.