/lit/ - Literature

>>5262103
"Exist" is a loaded term when it comes to mathematical objects. But what you're saying is basically the mathematical equivalent of the falling tree not making a sound unless someone is there to hear it. It's possible to argue, but it's just not very interesting.

Still *if* we accept that irrational numbers exist in some meaningful sense, then the statement

> If pi is normal, then the complete works of Shakespeare are contained in its decimal expansion

is provably true. If you're going to deny that kind of proof because it's not pointing to some physical object in the world, then you're denying almost all of higher mathematics.

Why can't the people in this thread just embrace pragmatism?

Richard Rorty is a pretty good gateway to Nietzsche and Heidegger. He doesn't say much about Schopenhauer AFAIK. Philosophy and Social Hope is the most accessible. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature and Congingency, Irony, Solidarity are his two major works.

>tfw when ironically embracing contingent beliefs and building a final vocabulary with the help of literature