/lit/ - Literature

It's absolutely amazing how we live in the age of the biggest technological breakthroughs in humanity yet brainlets here somehow have the gall to say math is "in decline".

>>20597135
What were his philosophical contributions?

>>20597206
Zilch, he was just a schizo. Mathfags can’t into philosophy because they don’t have the right type of brains

>>20597221
cope

why is grothendieck so frequently posted on this board lately? i'm as big a fan of him as the next guy, but as profound as many of his (non-mathematical) writings were he didn't come close to revolutionising anything outside of pure mathematics
category theory more generally has been relatively influential (but not widely outside of philosophy of mathematics), but all that wasn't Grothendieck's doing alone

>>20600243
The lesser beings here are attracted to eccentric mystics like flies to shit. Same phenomena as guenonfag

>>20600243
>i'm as big a fan of him as the next guy
No you’re not.
The only time I’ve heard of this nigga was seeing his name mentioned a few times in /sci/.
It’s some fag shilling him trying to make him the next big meme like Guenon.
Extremely transparently and incompetently so too, at least the Guenonfag(s) presented their meme author as a refutation of the previous meme author (Whitehead) so it felt slightly less inorganic

>>20600644
He's certainly farm more relevant than literally who Guenon

for me it's Kähler's monadology

Jeopardy question for /lit/ mathlets:
A book in Springer's Graduate Texts in Mathematics series that quotes Guénon's Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times.

>>20600644
at least whitehead and guenon were actual philosophers
grothendieck was a mathematician first and foremost, he did not produce original philosophical work (he was a deeply philosophical and introspective person whose work contains many insights, but this is not the same as being a philosopher)

>>20600243
channers are introverted losers who self insert themselves into obscure and unclaimed high iq hermit figures. but only the idea of them, they dont actually care about their biography or ideas, which is why posts about them are so low effort

>one of the smartest people in history
>christian
every time

>>20601246
indeed

>>20601309
Unfathomably based

>>20601309
>Either a property or its negation is positive, but not both
Why?

>>20601331
It's not necessarily. There's logics and mathematics where the law of excluded middle doesn't hold, even ones where it flatly isn't true, like synthetic differential geometry. There's no one "logic" to which to cling to.

>>20600598
HAHA this

and why is he dressed as an larping druid?

>>20597135
Who?

>>20601892
Some anarchist who wants to open semina at vietnam when war was going.

>>20601309
>Didn't believe in evolution
>thought laws of nature are a priori

Maybe he should stick to his field.

>>20600598
Yep, Guenon, Evola, Jung, Peterson, etc. It's really all a matter of which mystic best appeals to the individual anon's insecurities and aesthetic sensibilities. At least this guy contributed something of worth, so he's likely better than the rest of them
>>20597221
Descartes contributed seriously to both.

>>20600760
What is that?

>>20597157
Most of this is related to old math (earlier 20th century at most) and better physics(which do not use anything beyond linear algebra and functional analysis [also from the earlier 20th century]). I do not think math is in decline, if anything math is so ahead we don't even know when we get to apply (outside pure math) most of it.

>>20601331
Main model of mathematics depends heavily in the law of excluded middle. There are models that include it, but the one you learned by default in school(and also in math majors) is the one with law of excluded middle.

should math ever be for its own sake?

>>20602185
it already is

>>20602190
but should it be was my question

>>20602185
Yes, because nobody can predit at what point "useless" mathematics becomes useful. Many such cases of sudden new applicabilities.

>>20602208
so which is superior?