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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    This ontological disagreement about what computation *is*... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The theory of computing occupies common ground among competing mathematical philosophies (Formalism, Platonism, Intuitionism)

    This ontological disagreement about what computation *is* persists even when practitioners converge on the same formal results.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Formal results describe *what* computation produces, not *what* it fundamentally is or how it should be conceptualized.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Practitioners disagree on whether computation is physical process, abstract symbol manipulation, information transformation, or causal mechanism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Agreement on outputs/algorithms masks deeper disagreement about computational essence, similar to instrumentalism vs realism in physics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If practitioners converge on formal results and methods, their ontological disagreements are either terminological or epistemically irrelevant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Shared formal frameworks already encode shared commitments about computation's nature; ontological disputes often reflect philosophical preference, not substantive disagreement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The ability to translate between different conceptualizations of computation suggests underlying unity rather than genuine metaphysical incompatibility.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    All sources support it1 linkedTruth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    Agreement on outputs/algorithms masks deeper disagreement about computational es...Formal results describe *what* computation produces, not *what* it fundamentally...If practitioners converge on formal results and methods, their ontological disag...Practitioners disagree on whether computation is physical process, abstract symb...
    +3 moreShow less
    Shared formal frameworks already encode shared commitments about computation's n...The ability to translate between different conceptualizations of computation sug...The theory of computing occupies common ground among competing mathematical phil...

    Details

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