Math: Did we discover or create it?

[Doctordick]

Originally Posted by Pyrotex

Criticism well taken. Mea culpa.
...
This is using the dictionary as artillery.

I agree with you one hundred percent and don't take my criticism too seriously as you are one of the few people around here who is relatively careful about what he says. I too can "go off the handle", occasionally not thinking things out as well as I should. We all have opinions and sometimes it's difficult not to express them; perhaps sometimes a little stronger than is justified. Thanks for posting.

I appreciate having you around -- Dick

[virtualmeet]

Originally Posted by Pyrotex

As to the dictionary, though. Yes, it is an incredibly stabilizing factor, when well and thoughfully used. However, in several threads hereabouts, people have attempted to use a definition out of the dictionary that was soooo broad and general, that it included (at first glance) and number of non-too-related concepts. They then concluded that at least two of those concepts were "identical" since they both fit the definition...

You're right when saying that we should be careful when using a dictionary definition because it can lead us to much more confusions...
In fact, I don't like the definition above because it's too restrictive: this definition suppose that we must have three conditions (...sounds, words and grammar) . why "sounds" and not "gesture" (language used for persons with hearing difficulties) ? There are other questions about the accuracy of this definition
Some of you can say that I have to make a difference between "A system of communication" and a "language". So now, we have also to define exactly what's "A system of communication"

Originally Posted by Doctordick

...Goldwater's famous gaff, "listen to what I mean, not what I say!"

I agree with you two hundred percent

[Ahsmohdean]

God created it, and we discovered it and continue to discover the truth of the universe, this is what science is.

[questor]

Math is interesting! it is the same in all languages in that the results are constant. it is communication on a certain subject, it is language of a type, and it is certainly a science, in that it is ''to know''. it is pure, it is truth, and it is immutable. it is a concept discovered by man upon which all men can agree. wouldn't it be nice if other sciences could be so definite?

[sergey500]

We created math. Math is just something we use to subsitute our world we digits or X and Y's. That is as basic as I can say it. We created math, not discovered it. Discovering something is finding something that already exists, which is not the case her. Numbers are inside our minds, we created them. So in a sense all numbers are imaginary.

[kamil]

Yeah, we did create math in the sense that we created X's and the Y's and 0's and 1's etc. But that is just the representation of a concept which has already been used by nature. And nature would still function in a mathematically logical way even if we didnt exist in it!! All we did is put this logic in a formal way whcih can be found in textbooks, therefore my vote would have to be 'We discovered it'.
We ceated the word apple, buit not the fruit itself.

BTW, 'We discovered math' and 'We discovered math and improved it' is the same thing since they both claim that 'we discovered math' and isnt this discusion all about 'We discovered Vs We created'. Im sure both sides agree we have made a contribution ot our understanding of it.

[Guadalupe]

Originally Posted by Edge

Hi, everyone. I'm new here. I saw this forum for the first time on a thread about Evolution and Intelligent Design, you know, the classic debate.

Anyway, here's something I can't understand or figure out: math.

We all know how important math is on the world, not arguing that. However, there are people that think that we discovered the laws of math, while others say that we created them (kinda like a language). There is also debate about if it's really a science or not? So, what do you think?

Is math something we created and improved, or something that was there just to be discovered?

Hi Edge,

I did some research and found that math was indeed created. Math, are equations to find solutions to problems. Math, are like tools were first created, then they were improved upon to help solve other problems in other fields where math is used.

My research also finds that laws of math were not discovered, they were created.

[woog]

Hi I'm new here. I have a bit of unease at what the term "math" encompasses. For instance at one end there is math, a body of truths. At the other end is "doing" math. Perhaps how we define it is important to this debate?

It's a description of nature, in the same way a photo is represents reality in a sense. For instance, "all humans have a head, two arms and two feet" is a description of reality (not always true) and a conclusion one may arrive at after a bit of contemplation.

Did we create this fact or was that "truth" already there. Did we create the discription used: "human", "head", "arm" etc? I think mathematics generally is understood to cover the truth and the description, which I find need to be separated for this debate.

[Pyrotex]

Originally Posted by woog

Hi I'm new here. I have a bit of unease at what the term "math" encompasses. For instance at one end there is math, a body of truths. At the other end is "doing" math. Perhaps how we define it is important to this debate?...Did we create this fact or was that "truth" already there?...

Excellent question. YES! How we define 'math' is crucial to this debate. Also how we define 'language' and perhaps even 'created' and 'discovered'.

Without a solid foundation of definitions, this debate will be mostly a game of tennis with opinions flying over the net, and no referee to call the out-of-bounds. Even then, it still is fun.

We could narrow this down to the first 'math'.

Was Euclid's Geometry an act of discovery or invention?

[woog]

Originally Posted by Pyrotex

How we define 'math' is crucial to this debate. Also how we define 'language' and perhaps even 'created' and 'discovered'.

Without knowing it, we seem to be heading down a path not too dissimilar to that of mathematicians at the turn of the 20th century. Both in terms of the discussion, as well as trying to define explicitly the concepts in point. I'm referring to the axioms of mathematics here.

Was Euclid's Geometry an act of discovery or invention?

Euclid's geometry can still be separated into objects such as 'lines' and 'points', and the body of truths about these objects.

Perhaps we could narrow this further: the concepts commonly referred to as 1, 2, 3... did we create these concepts? What about the relationships between these objects?