Just a smidge of a reply, because I haven’t grokked all of the above but this felt maybe useful:
Math (and certain ways of doing logic in general) has an unusual property in that it is an extremely parsimonious map? It’s a map that clings super tightly to the territory, with unusually little in the way of the problems gestured at in the image below.
So maybe that resolves the distinction between “wait, amn’t I in full contact with the territory?” and “wait, amn’t I also just staring at my map?”
Unlike most maps, math/logic don’t throw a wide lasso around lots and lots of points; they’re skeletal and precise, and so it’s less the case that you will lose track of the difference between your map and the thing your map is mapping.
Just a smidge of a reply, because I haven’t grokked all of the above but this felt maybe useful:
Math (and certain ways of doing logic in general) has an unusual property in that it is an extremely parsimonious map? It’s a map that clings super tightly to the territory, with unusually little in the way of the problems gestured at in the image below.
So maybe that resolves the distinction between “wait, amn’t I in full contact with the territory?” and “wait, amn’t I also just staring at my map?”
Unlike most maps, math/logic don’t throw a wide lasso around lots and lots of points; they’re skeletal and precise, and so it’s less the case that you will lose track of the difference between your map and the thing your map is mapping.
Maybe.
Snippet of thought.