Are Numbers Manmade?

[RCSaunders]

A more profound question other than are numbers man made [ yes they are ] is was mathematics discovered or invented
One that sadly does not have a definitive answer to it although then again neither does any other philosophical question

All knowledge methods, like language, mathematics, logic, and geometry, are human inventions and the purpose of them all is to make it possible for human being to conceptually identify the facts of reality. Numbers were invented to make it possible to identify those facts of reality that have quantity as one of their attributes, like collections of animals, coins, and family members, and counting is the method invented to establish those quantities.

So both questions are easily and exactly answered. Mathematics was invented to deal with the fact some aspects of reality have quantity as attributes (an ontological fact), but the mathematical concepts, as inventions, only exist in human minds (epistemologically).

[RCSaunders]

The question is similar to asking if words are manmade. Of course words are manmade and so are numbers.

Numbers were created to represent amounts. As such, numbers are a frame of reference for amounts.

Without numbers, referring to amounts would be vague. Without numbers, someone might "many, few, massive, some, a lot, etc." but each term is not specific. Numbers give people the ability to be specific.

Saying I have many chickens and some cattle is not specific but saying I have 32 chickens and 4 steers is specific. Not only that I can specify the weight and value of each animal and the total value as well.

That's right. If there were no human beings there would be no mathematics. While much of reality would have attributes of quantity the human method of identifying those attributes (mathematics) would not exist.

[Eodnhoj7]

A more profound question other than are numbers man made [ yes they are ] is was mathematics discovered or invented
One that sadly does not have a definitive answer to it although then again neither does any other philosophical question

All knowledge methods, like language, mathematics, logic, and geometry, are human inventions and the purpose of them all is to make it possible for human being to conceptually identify the facts of reality. Numbers were invented to make it possible to identify those facts of reality that have quantity as one of their attributes, like collections of animals, coins, and family members, and counting is the method invented to establish those quantities.

So both questions are easily and exactly answered. Mathematics was invented to deal with the fact some aspects of reality have quantity as attributes (an ontological fact), but the mathematical concepts, as inventions, only exist in human minds (epistemologically).

How does one invent a quantity that stems across multiple symbols as having the same meaning?

[commonsense]

How does one invent a quantity that stems across multiple symbols as having the same meaning?

By “stems across multiple symbols as having the same meaning” do you mean there would be multiple symbols that express the same quantity?

[Eodnhoj7]

How does one invent a quantity that stems across multiple symbols as having the same meaning?

By “stems across multiple symbols as having the same meaning” do you mean there would be multiple symbols that express the same quantity?

Yes.

[commonsense]

How does one invent a quantity that stems across multiple symbols as having the same meaning?

By “stems across multiple symbols as having the same meaning” do you mean there would be multiple symbols that express the same quantity?

Yes.

Got it.

Here are some symbols that have the same meaning:

1, I, i, uno, echad, one, lone, singular, unitary, unique

Although there are many symbols—and we can invent more—that express the same quantity, we cannot invent quantities in the sense that we cannot create them. It’s just like the difference between numbers and numerals.

[Eodnhoj7]

By “stems across multiple symbols as having the same meaning” do you mean there would be multiple symbols that express the same quantity?

Yes.

Got it.

Here are some symbols that have the same meaning:

1, I, i, uno, echad, one, lone, singular, unitary, unique

Although there are many symbols—and we can invent more—that express the same quantity, we cannot invent quantities in the sense that we cannot create them. It’s just like the difference between numbers and numerals.

Now do we invent the symbol making process?

[commonsense]

Yes.

Got it.

Here are some symbols that have the same meaning:

1, I, i, uno, echad, one, lone, singular, unitary, unique

Although there are many symbols—and we can invent more—that express the same quantity, we cannot invent quantities in the sense that we cannot create them. It’s just like the difference between numbers and numerals.

Now do we invent the symbol making process?

Yes, the symbols are human inventions. The quantities exist without human intervention. I think we are in agreement.

[Eodnhoj7]

Got it.

Here are some symbols that have the same meaning:

1, I, i, uno, echad, one, lone, singular, unitary, unique

Although there are many symbols—and we can invent more—that express the same quantity, we cannot invent quantities in the sense that we cannot create them. It’s just like the difference between numbers and numerals.

Now do we invent the symbol making process?

Yes, the symbols are human inventions. The quantities exist without human intervention. I think we are in agreement.

Do we invent the symbol making process?

[commonsense]

Do we invent the symbol making process?

What rules are there, if any, to the process of assigning symbols to numbers (or assigning symbols to anything)?

[Skepdick]

Do we invent the symbol making process?

In so far as the invented/discovered distinction doesn't matter - yes we do.

Aristotle started it all. Law of identity. A is itself.

And he created A.

[Skepdick]

What rules are there, if any, to the process of assigning symbols to numbers (or assigning symbols to anything)?

Whatever rules we say there are, they are subject to Wittgenstein's rule-following paradox.

In Philosophical Investigations §201a: no course of action could be determined by a rule, because any course of action can be made out to accord with the rule.

That is where logical positivism began insisting on testability criteria. How do I determine (a posteriori) whether I've followed a rule correctly?

[commonsense]

Do we invent the symbol making process?

In so far as the invented/discovered distinction doesn't matter - yes we do.

Aristotle started it all. Law of identity. A is itself.

And he created A.

He created A, but did he create whatever steps are involved in creating a name for a (new) thing?

And is the law of identity part of the naming process or the result of the process?

[Skepdick]

He created A, but did he create whatever steps are involved in creating a name for a (new) thing?

A is itself.
A rose is a rose is a rose.

And is the law of identity part of the naming process or the result of the process?

Sure. Recursion.

[commonsense]

He created A, but did he create whatever steps are involved in creating a name for a (new) thing?

A is itself.
A rose is a rose is a rose.

“That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” ~ W.S.Shakespeare

How did a rose come to be associated with its name, I.e. the word “rose”?

I don’t think we are quite there yet as far as a functioning process goes.

And is the law of identity part of the naming process or the result of the process?

Sure. Recursion.

Makes sense.