Is Mathematics Invented or Discovered?

[Yali]

Is Mathematics Invented or Discovered? @Leo Gura

[Gesundheit2]

Is the English language invented or discovered?

[Mulky]

I guess really everything is discovered and not invented.  Before phones were invented they already existed somewhere, the exact combination of things coming together to be a cell phone was discovered.  So invented would be a smaller designation within discovery.  Like the way most people use the word "natural" is a smaller designation within the more absolute definition of "natural" which would be everything.

[Preety_India]

Discovered 

You can't invent something that already exists 

 

[Batman]

1 hour ago, Preety_India said:

Discovered 

You can't invent something that already exists 

 

It doesn't exist. It is invented by the human mind. Math is a language, and language exists only in mind. Do you see any 1, 2, +, = in your perception? No. Those are symbols that operate as language. They represent a thing that they are not. 

[Preety_India]

@Batman language is used to describe what exists. 

 

[Jodistrict]

Traditionally,  patent laws have considered mathematics to be a discovery, and thus mathematics can’t be patented.  However, eventually US law allowed for the patenting of an algorithm, as long as it was embedded in physical form, i.e. a computer.   However, cognitively, mathematics can be highly creative, and seems to be an invention.

[axiom]

5 hours ago, Yali said:

Is Mathematics Invented or Discovered? @Leo Gura

Mathematics is a very, very, VERY stubborn layer of glue that is almost impossible to remove, but it is not the substrate.

[Michael Jackson]

Absolutely speaking, everything is an invention. Even the physical laws of this universe are invented, by your true Self.

Relatively speaking math is a normal language, just like english for example (I studied a good amount of math at college). The language of math could look very differently if we designed it in a different way.

[JosephKnecht]

Maybe the moment of discovery is the moment of invention. 

Maybe. 

[RMQualtrough]

3 hours ago, Batman said:

It doesn't exist. It is invented by the human mind. Math is a language, and language exists only in mind. Do you see any 1, 2, +, = in your perception? No. Those are symbols that operate as language. They represent a thing that they are not. 

The objects you see conform to VERY precise mathematical patterns. Especially the geometry you see while tripping, see all those eyes forming that flower shape? Or the shifting shapes...

Like science, math is good at describing how things behave, but also arranged. They remain good for those purposes...

[Batman]

33 minutes ago, JosephKnecht said:

Maybe the moment of discovery is the moment of invention. 

Maybe. 

Why maybe? For sure. When you "discover" something, you are actually creating (inventing) a distinction of that thing. That distinction never existed in your experience until you created it. When it comes to the conceptual domain, where all forms of language reside, it is even more obvious that it is a distinction created by mind/intellect.

 

3 hours ago, Preety_India said:

@Batman language is used to describe what exists. 

 

Not exactly. Language is referring to something it is not, which is what I meant when I wrote that the symbols that constitute language are representation of something that the symbol itself isn't. For example, the symbol of infinity (∞) might point to infinity, but it will never describe or represent infinity fully, because a symbol is limited and Infinity has no limits or fixation. This can also apply to finite symbols, for example the number 2 doesn't fully represent every 2 units in existence. So, in a way we can say that language always creates misrepresentation.

 

6 minutes ago, RMQualtrough said:

The objects you see conform to VERY precise mathematical patterns. Especially the geometry you see while tripping, see all those eyes forming that flower shape? Or the shifting shapes...

Like science, math is good at describing how things behave, but also arranged. They remain good for those purposes...

The only thing you are saying here is that math is a very precise language to represent reality. Languages may or may not be highly accurate, but they are still invented in the mind. So it is a game of creating the most accurate representation. 

Edited May 23, 2022 by Batman

[Preety_India]

Just now, Batman said:

Not exactly. Language is referring to something it is not, which is what I meant when I wrote that the symbols that constitute language are representation of something that the symbol itself isn't. For example, the symbol of infinity (∞) might point to infinity, but it will never describe or represent infinity fully, because a symbol is limited and Infinity has no limits or fixation. So, in a way we can say that language always creates misrepresentation.

But infinity exists 

[Batman]

1 minute ago, Preety_India said:

But infinity exists 

No, it doesn't. How could it exist? In order for something to exist, it must have some limitation or form. If Infinity had some form or limitation, it would be finite and not infinite. 

[RMQualtrough]

@Batman If you said created that would be different in meaning. It's not invented... But literally everything is created.

[zurew]

Language is something that is invented. The purpose of any language is to represent something. That something can "exist"  , however the pointer (the language used) is invented.

You can attach any meaning to any symbol. The underlying meaning that matters, not the symbol. The symbol is just a pointer or a tool to point to some underlying meaning/factor. But the symbol itself can't represent fully the underlying structure,  just in a finite way.

Edited May 23, 2022 by zurew

[Batman]

3 minutes ago, RMQualtrough said:

@Batman If you said created that would be different in meaning. It's not invented... But literally everything is created.

In the context of forming language using the mind, created and invented are the same.

[Fernanda]

The question contains the underling assumption that there is "something out there to be discovered". Anything we can imagine/invent/discover/create is consciousness. Patent laws can make this distinction, though, since it is useful somehow.

Edited May 23, 2022 by Fernanda

[softlyblossoming]

On 23/05/2022 at 11:15 AM, Batman said:

On 23/05/2022 at 10:43 AM, JosephKnecht said:

Maybe the moment of discovery is the moment of invention. 

Maybe. 

Why maybe? For sure. When you "discover" something, you are actually creating (inventing) a distinction of that thing. That distinction never existed in your experience until you created it. When it comes to the conceptual domain, where all forms of language reside, it is even more obvious that it is a distinction created by mind/intellect.

There is nothing 'for sure' in reality. Everything is maybe/apparently/seemingly/appearing-to-be/perhaps-this-way-perhaps-that-way/dependent on our state of consciousness or our paradigm or our beliefs/etc. The reality is that reality is constructed/imagined/illusory all the way up and all the way down with no topmost/bottommost/'ultimate'/'final'/'true' layer. Nothing is true = nothing is 'for sure' = every honest answer is a 'maybe'.

This not-for-sure-ness is the Buddha. The Buddha is the Dhamma. The Dhamma is what's not for sure. Whoever sees that things aren't for sure, sees for sure that that's the way they are. The way they are doesn't change into anything else. That's the way things are. That's what the Dhamma is like. And that's what the Buddha is like. If you see the Dhamma, you see the Buddha; if you see the Buddha, you see the Dhamma. If you know inconstancy, not-for-sure-ness, you'll let things go of your own accord. You won't grasp onto them.

There's no way we can guarantee for sure that this has to be this, or that has to be that, so the Buddha said to just put it down as "not for sure." No matter how much you like something, you have to know that it's not for sure. No matter how much you dislike something, you have to understand that it's not for sure. And these things really aren't for sure. Keep practicing until they're dhammas.

—Ajahn Chah (source: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/chah/not_for_sure.html)

I hope this cleared things up or you find it useful in your contemplations, @Batman 

Edited May 25, 2022 by softlyblossoming
hopefully made explanation more clear

[Batman]

4 hours ago, softlyblossoming said:

There is nothing 'for sure' in reality. Everything is maybe/apparently/seemingly/appearing-to-be/perhaps-this-way-perhaps-that-way/dependent on our state of consciousness or our paradigm or our beliefs/etc. The reality is that reality is constructed/imagined/illusory all the way up and all the way down with no topmost/bottommost/'ultimate'/'final'/'true' layer. Nothing is true = nothing is 'for sure' = every honest answer is a 'maybe'.

Yea, which is why I said everything is an invention.