Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that If axiom choice itself depends on conventions shaped by sensorimotor experience, sense perception is never fully expelled from geometric reasoning.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Formal proofs in geometry succeed precisely because they suspend sensory dependence through explicit axiomatization and logical derivation rules.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Alternative axiom systems (non-Euclidean geometries) are proven consistent despite contradicting sensory intuitions, showing reasoning transcends perception.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The origin of axiom choice (evolutionary or embodied) is causally distinct from whether those axioms yield objective mathematical truths.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Mathematical axioms are chosen by human mathematicians whose conceptual frameworks evolved through embodied interaction with physical space.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The parallel postulate's historical rejection in some cultures correlates with different spatial intuitions shaped by environmental affordances.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Even abstract set theory uses spatial metaphors (membership, containment) that originate in sensorimotor schemas of physical objects.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.