Kenny wrote:Just to be clear, I hold the position that it is people using math who predicts things; and you guys are holding the position that it is actually math that is predicting these things, and people gained the knowledge by discovering math thus obtaining all the knowledge math provided. Please explain the difference.
Why did you re-formulate the original question?
Such seems to me purposefully shifty.
As Rick pointed out, the original question posed by the video that I introduced was:
"Is Math a Feature of the Universe, or a Feature of Human Creation?"
You seem to side with the latter. As for myself, I side with neither without qualification, because I feel the question is a false dichotomy that doesn't get to the heart of the confusion.
The ontological nature of math, what it is (i.e., something is moving at a certain speed whether or not there are humans to describe such), is exhibited as a property of our universe. Therefore, yes I believe maths is a feature of our universe which humans learn and discover and represent in different mathematical languages that they create (where such becomes human "maths knowledge").
There is an issue however, and that is with the universe (1) or without the universe (0), maths appears to be an eternal feature. This might pose a problem for Theists who see God as the only being who is eternal, and yet, maths might be eternal but I see it is contingent upon mind. Maths has a qualitative feel of a concept or idea. Therefore while maths exhibits itself as a feature of our universe, it nonetheless appears to me reducible to or derived from "mind".
Given maths appears to be an eternal property, then this mind likewise would be eternal upon which maths is dependant for its own existence. Therefore, I reach the conclusion that a being like God provides the best explanation for the existence of maths, although Pantheism or consciousness being a part of the natural fabric of the universe (panpsychism) can't be ruled out also.