✳flâneur — a map of the web's best reading

2

kaarelh.github.io · 2,377 words · saved by 1 readers

The weaker claim that I could make here is that this is only true typically — i.e., that “if 𝑃 is infinite, then”how should one do 𝑃 ?” is usually also infinite. I think the weaker claim would be fine to support the rest of the discussion, but I’ve decided to go with the stronger claim for now as it still seems plausible. To adapt an ancient biology olympiad adage: it might be that all universally quantified statements are false, but the ones that are nearly true are worth their weight in gold. Anyway, I admit that the claim being true ends up depending on how one measures progress on a problem (as discussed briefly also in the last item), which I haven’t properly specified. For these notes, I would like to keep getting away with saying we’re measuring progress in some intuitive way which is like the way mathematicians measure progress when saying math is infinite.↩︎ I think the metaethical problem of providing sth like axioms for ethics is also infinite, despite the fact that it

2 2 infinitude spreads An endeavor being infinite often causes other related endeavors to be infinite. In particular: If \(E\) is an infinite endeavor, then “how should one do \(E\) ?” is also infinite. 1 For example: math is infinite, so “how should one do math?” is infinite; ethics is infinite, so “how should one do ethics?” is infinite. 2 If \(E\) is an infinite endeavor and there is a “faithful reduction” of \(E\) to another endeavor \(F\) , then \(F\) is also infinite. (In particular, if an infinite endeavor \(E\) is “faithfully” a subset of another endeavor \(F\) , then \(F\) is also inf

Explore this link on the map →

related reading