RE: Deism for non-believers
June 12, 2012 at 6:22 pm
(This post was last modified: June 12, 2012 at 6:22 pm by Angrboda.)
(June 12, 2012 at 12:52 am)Skepsis Wrote:(June 11, 2012 at 9:43 pm)apophenia Wrote: I'm not of the opinion that there's anything ontologically distinctive about math and numbers, but then I wouldn't lean towards Quine's belief that mathematical concepts are derived empirically either.
I don't know if you contradicted yourself or if you misinterpreted Quine's empirical take as being in opposition to the Kantian "intuit" of math. The two don't conflict with one another, but, if I can take your statements at face value, are very complementary.
Oh, I think the simple answer is that I don't know what I'm talking about. I've glanced at some stuff, but I'm very ignorant of the subject. I will say, however, even though I'm grossly ignorant of the subject, from what I've read, I think you're being overly charitable toward Quine.
Anyway, for some irrational reason I like Quine. However, my bailiwick is cognitive science, psychology, theory of discourses and epistemology. And I'm pretty ignorant even on those subjects. So this is just a novice spitballing, not an educated opinion.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)