Why, how do you do?

[Tiberius]

I said 1.999... is equal to 2.

I'm not going to rise to your ridiculous notions of the supernatural, they are irrelevant. If you want to discuss mathematical proofs, we can discuss them, but you aren't going to get a rise out of me by comparing me to a theist or saying I believe in the supernatural. Sorry to disappoint you.

[Purple Rabbit]

Well, that's a dissapointing answer Adrian. You should be able to counter the comparison with the supernatural realm with solid argument but you resort to irrelevant subjective qualifications. In what does your realm of mathematical fabulation differ ftrom the supernatural than? You clearly claim numbers exist, don't you? Are you claiming that numbers are natural or not? If not, than why do you show emotion when I call it supernatural?

[Tiberius]

Numbers exist in mathematics. Mathematics is a system which humans use to quantify reality, and this has been expanded through use of logical reasoning to cover far more than it did originally. I fail to see where the supernatural comes into it when it is clearly a form of thinking in the minds of humans. So, as I said before, you can drop the act...you won't get some sort of rise out of me.

[Purple Rabbit]

This is not just a joke. This is subject in philosophical debate. Starting with Plato (as far as I can trace it) numerous great minds have wrestled with it. Mathematics may be a system which humans use to quantify reality, mathematical concepts are not part of reality. You can't find perfect circles in nature. So mathematics is not necessarily a reality within nature but just an aspect of our models of nature. I hope you can grasp this and its implication and lower that "nothing-supernatural-in-my-backyard" defence shield of yours. And yes I tickled you somewhat to get to this point. If mathematical concepts aren't part of the natural world and if you allow there to be a strict dichotomy between natural and supernatural, these concepts are part of the supernatural. I challenge you to refute this since I think those arguments should be baggage of every atheist debater. So to assure you, I contend that I have played the devil's advocate here somewhat, but I assure you your quest is mine.

[Tiberius]

I don't care to respond for a couple reasons:

1) I don't care for people who form some kind of annoying facade in order to get to a point. If you wanted to debate mathematics vs. nature, you should have come out with it plainly.

2) I'm not interested in the subject of mathematics as a supernatural concept; I think it's a way of human reasoning. You could equally suggest that logic was a supernatural concept too, but it doesn't get you anywhere.

I'm sure there are others who would discuss it with you, so by all means start a thread somewhere. Who knows, you might say something I can't resist responding to. The only reason I mentioned mathematics here is because BioLogos is a math teacher, and the most vivid example of our discussions of mathematics on the forums are the 0.999... = 1 debate.

[fr0d0]

Haha loving it

[Purple Rabbit]

I don't care to respond for a couple reasons:

1) I don't care for people who form some kind of annoying facade in order to get to a point. If you wanted to debate mathematics vs. nature, you should have come out with it plainly.

2) I'm not interested in the subject of mathematics as a supernatural concept; I think it's a way of human reasoning. You could equally suggest that logic was a supernatural concept too, but it doesn't get you anywhere.

I'm sure there are others who would discuss it with you, so by all means start a thread somewhere. Who knows, you might say something I can't resist responding to. The only reason I mentioned mathematics here is because BioLogos is a math teacher, and the most vivid example of our discussions of mathematics on the forums are the 0.999... = 1 debate.

Ha, if anything your 0.999 thread is an annoying facade to portray your self-acclaimed mathematical superiority. But if you cannot see that I've presented my argument in the tradition of the socratic method you disqualify for further debate on it.

[Tiberius]

Ha, if anything your 0.999 thread is an annoying facade to portray your self-acclaimed mathematical superiority.

If understanding mathematical concepts like infinity makes me mathematically superior, then yes, I suppose it would. I have no problems with my education in mathematics, my course at university is dependant on it. How else would you solve multi-dimensional computer learning problems? (Oh, and the problems take up more dimensions that 26...just saying )

But if you cannot see that I've presented my argument in the tradition of the socratic method you disqualify for further debate on it.

You presented your argument, sure, but after you messed around for a few posts for no apparent reason other than to get on my nerves. I don't respect that behaviour at all.

[Purple Rabbit]

Oh come on as if your not ever on my nerves. Give your nerves a nice little rest then.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

And you seem to be able to read and write!

Only barely: I'm a mathematician.

Could be war worse, you could be a philosopher and perfectly literate but unintelligible.

Besides,isn't maths a language?

Welcome.

PS: I like Lapsong Suchong and sex.. (in that order)