Narwhal (narwhal)'s status on Sunday, 14-Dec-14 02:25:21 UTC
-
If you insist I'll try and expand a bit. So like, math is a concept with rules, right? Cool. So within the confines of a mathematical context, using the set of real numbers as defined by the laws of mathematics we can determine 2 added to another 2 will result in 4. Now, the tricky part, like I mentioned earlier, comes with the epistemological side of this problem. Like, an empiricist might argue without tangible perception of this concept outside of its representation on paper there's no way of "knowing" it, whereas a rationalist might say knowledge is innate and therefore by thinking of 2+2=4 you prove that you know it. A follower of skepticism might say that the idea of 2 added to itself equaling 4 is not innate and is being manipulated by a force outside of our own minds, using a contrast case as an example, but a verificationist could argue this by saying that the use of math as a system validates and therefores proves the knowledge of 2+2=4.
