"A drawn circle is at least something physical. You can see it, touch it, erase it. The skeptic can still say, "Circles are grounded in physical reality. Justice is different; it's just an idea in your head." So let's talk about the number two. Point to it. Not two apples, not two fingers, not a numeral on a page-that's just a symbol."
"You can't. Two has no weight, no color, no location. It's never been photographed or observed under a microscope. It has zero physical existence. And yet would anyone argue that two is "just relative"? That mathematics is merely a cultural construction? Of course not. Two is one of the most reliable, universally functional realities we know. It works across every culture, language, and historical period. It works whether anyone believes in it."
The number two lacks physical properties—no weight, color, or location—and cannot be pointed to or photographed. Despite lacking physical existence, two functions as an objective, universally applicable reality across cultures, languages, and historical periods. Mathematics and numerical truths operate independently of belief or cultural framing. Moral ideals such as justice likewise lack tangible form but can possess reality comparable to numbers. The main difference between numbers and ideals lies in precision, not ontological status. Every act of counting and measurement presupposes abstract, Platonic Forms that ground numerical and evaluative concepts.
Read at Psychology Today
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]