Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Maddy's early immanent realism can account for the massiv... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Maddy's early immanent realism can account for the massive infinities in mathematics.

    Modality & Possibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • On Maddy's view, corresponding to every physical object there is a huge infinity of sets existing in spacetime at the location of that physical object.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Immanent realism ties mathematical existence to physical instantiation, yet modern set theory posits sets of cardinality far exceeding any physical objects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If sets exist only where physical objects are located, the transfinite hierarchy beyond beth-omega lacks any spatiotemporal grounding, undermining the account.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Maddy's positing of infinitely many sets at each physical location is ontologically profligate in ways that violate parsimony constraints defended by nominalists like Field.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An account that multiplies unobservable infinitary entities at every spacetime point inherits Platonism's epistemic access problems without gaining its ontological clarity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    An account that multiplies unobservable infinitary entities at every spacetime p...If sets exist only where physical objects are located, the transfinite hierarchy...Immanent realism ties mathematical existence to physical instantiation, yet mode...Maddy's positing of infinitely many sets at each physical location is ontologica...
    +1 moreShow less
    On Maddy's view, corresponding to every physical object there is a huge infinity...

    Similar

    Psychologism cannot adequately account for the huge infinities in math...83%Set theory entails the existence of huge infinities of mathematical ob...80%Standard set theories entail that there actually exist huge infinities...78%Maddy's immanent realism is not a physicalist view in the sense releva...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: platonism
    View source passageHide passage
    (These arguments do not refute the kind of immanent realism defended by the early Maddy (1990). On Maddy's view, sets of physical objects are located in spacetime, right where their members are. Thus, if you have two eggs in your hand, then you also have the set containing those eggs in your hand. Maddy's view has no problem accounting for the massive infinities in mathematics, for on her view, corresponding to every physical object, there is a huge infinity of sets that exist in space and time,
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit