Paul,

Just for fun I'll list a few 'isms' that you seem to be affiliated:

Constructivist: You deny mathematical infinities

Platonist: You believe non-infinite mathematical structures have an ontological existence.

Theist: You believe in the existence of God or gods.

Idealist: You believe that material things are not the ultimate reality, but rather the mental aspects of the world are primary.

Dualist: You believe that the mind is not the brain, but rather there is 'something' else non-material to human consciousness.

Spiritualist: You believe that humans can contact spirits from other worlds.

Presentist: You believe that the passage of time is real and not something that is an illusion. There is a 'now'.

Endurantist: I'm guessing here, but I think you think that all of 'you' is in the 'now'. That is, the 'you' of 5 years ago is now 'you'.

Scientific realist: I'm guessing again, but you seem to be both a theoretical-realist and entity-realist. That is, you think the laws of physics exist independent of the human mind and the entities that physicists describe are also real.

Phenomenologist: At times your philosophy has struck me as somewhat phenomenologist because you have emphasized the importance of the observer to the point to where I sensed that you thought only in terms of the observer. This somewhat contradicts the scientific realist part of you, so maybe you are a person in conflict (along with your constructivism/platonism sides).

Don't worry, none of the above are fatal (smile).

Warm regards, Harv

• What I am - yanniru - April 25, 2001 - 15:56 UTC
  • Would you like to debate infinity in math? - paulm - April 26, 2001 - 16:05 UTC
    • Interested - yanniru - April 26, 2001 - 18:33 UTC
      • Good, maybe we can both learn something, - paulm - April 27, 2001 - 17:01 UTC
        • Grainy geometry - yanniru - April 27, 2001 - 17:57 UTC
          • Plane out of point? No way. - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 21:25 UTC
            • Not a single point - yanniru - April 27, 2001 - 21:50 UTC
              • Nope, won't work. Matrix does not make a plane or a line. - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 22:10 UTC
                • You do not need to define line in descrete math - yanniru - April 27, 2001 - 22:57 UTC
                  • We talking geometry - alexander - April 30, 2001 - 17:51 UTC
    • axiom of choice - mathman - April 27, 2001 - 04:04 UTC
      • Here's the connection I see - paulm - April 27, 2001 - 17:52 UTC
        • QM is one of example of discrete math. - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 21:33 UTC
          • I'm talking about finite; not discrete. (NT) - paulm - April 27, 2001 - 21:53 UTC
            • So, what is the diff: non-finite versus discrete? - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 22:13 UTC
              • Finite implies discrete; not the other way around. - paulm - April 28, 2001 - 00:42 UTC
• Wow! I'm impressed. Thanks, Harv (NT) - paulm - April 27, 2001 - 18:24 UTC
  • LOL, you sound like my version of you *smile* (nt) - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 20:48 UTC