Language, Mathematics, and Reductionism (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Friday, January 21, 2011, 16:05 (5054 days ago) @ David Turell


> > First a couple of observations: David, I've found you (quite often) chastising the reductionist approach to explaining the world. However; recently you've found a new appreciation for math. What gives? There is nothing in all of humanity that is more reductionist than math! Yet you've refuted many, many, times the idea that life or the universe can be explained by reductionism. 
> > 
> > How do you reconcile these two opposing views?
> 
> I don't have to: e=mc^2 may be a reductionist statement but it presents a huge concept of our reality. I look at forests, not trees, for my final conclusions. I may understand the dendrology of a tree species, but it leads to recognizing all-encompassing fractal formulae for the whole forest.-So do you think that the mathematical concepts we describe the universe are the same as what the creator uses?

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"