• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

shopping 4 kicks in this day,in this age

spaceman

spaceman

Lifer
so i go to the mall, need some sneakers.
i go into this store.
all they have is casual shoes with gfx splashed all over the side.
then they had some checkered off the walls. and i asked the telly if it was 1985i told him id buy em only if i could get some neon grip tape and a gator board to go with them
he was whatever
there wasnt one pair of kicks in this store that didnt have some dumbass gfx all over em.
unless i wanted to go real old school kneehi cons or dzz hicks typs shit
i ended up picking up a pair of fishheads and i dont really like em 🙁
 
Holy crap, this thread actually makes sense!

I am not enjoying it as much as a regular spaceman thread.

🙁
 
It would be a mistake to think that a theory postulating abstract objects is incompatible with our theories of natural science, which seem to presuppose that the only things that exist are the things governed by our true scientific theories.

To see that the theory of abstract objects is compatible with natural scientific theories, we only have to think of abstract objects as possible and actual property-patterns. These patterns of properties objectify a group of properties that satisfy a certain pattern. For example, it will turn out that the real number p can be thought of as the pattern of properties satisfying the open sentence "According to the axioms of real number theory, p has the property F" (where "F" is a variable ranging over properties). There are an infinite number of properties satisfying this pattern (and an infinite number that don't). Our theory of abstract objects will "objectify" or "reify" the group of properties satisfying this pattern.

So, on this view of what abstract objects are, we need not think of them as some ghostly, imperceptible kind of nonspatiotemporal substances. Instead, they are possible and actual patterns that are grounded in the arrangement of particles in the natural world and in the systematic behavior and linguistic usage of mathematicians and scientists as they discover, state, and apply theories of the natural world.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top