you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 3 years ago (4 children)

This is just an attack on absolutely everything that isn't a hard-science based in mathematics. Or poo poo pee pee for short.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    Thus the intense drive by neo-liberal economists to mathematize their "science." It's physics envy. A bunch of dorks made massive assumptions about human behavior and motivations because that made it a lot easier to model with mathematics, then spent the next century jacking themselves off until they were left with nothing but a bloody stump.

    Too bad their assumptions WERE WRONG and they should be laughed at for being such dorks :farquaad-point:

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (1 child)

    Except that mathematics mostly isn't a "casual model generating precise predictions", especially at the higher levels, famously so with the philosophical failures of Bertrand Russell.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    Gödel tapping the sign

    No consistent system of axioms whose theorems can be listed by an effective procedure (i.e., an algorithm) is capable of proving all truths about the arithmetic of natural numbers

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    :wojak-nooo: Kronecker and Wittgenstein crying: Noooo! you can't use a diagonalization argument to prove by contradiction.

    Cantor, Gödel and Turing: haha, well look at that, the diagonal can't exist. QED

    Whoops: Hilbert actually liked Cantor's proof.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    Just your average STEM douchebag

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    Here's the twist: This guy isn't a STEM lord, he's an assistant professor for philosophy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago*

    Well that's fucking hilarious

    Love to "make casual models generating precise predictions" for philosophy problems such as the problem of universals

    Fuckin dweeb needs to go back to helping determine the answers to such critical conundrums as "does a haybale exist if you remove five pieces of straw from it"

  • source
  • parent