The Black Vault

What has more relative ontological primacy, man or math?

Does math depend on man to exist, or does math exist independently of man?

Premise 1: If the set of natural numbers has ontological primacy, then math has ontological primacy.

Premise 2: There is no largest number.

Conclusion: Math has ontological primacy.

Why:
If numbers depended on mankind to exist, there would be a largest number.
Premise 2 then implies that numbers do not depend on mankind to exist.
By Premise 1, math has ontological primacy.

everything is math so, I say, it was discovered.
hmm
unless you look at it like..math is just a way of mapping everything..in that way, maybe it wasn't already there.

I think , though, simply because things ARE, so it IS.
Things relate to each other..that's math..how things relate..it's a given

I say where we come in, is in the system of math we have chosen to use

I think that's open, like the light spectrum, or the sound spectrum (if that makes sense)

we set our parameters for it..the parameters we have chosen to use

Math is a tool used to apprehend the mindscape of God.

and philosophy?
Maybe a hybrid is called for?
'mathosophy'

philosophy asks questions like "is math invented or discovered" while math people do long division all day But one can be both a mathematician and philosopher. A mathospoher you could say.

I'd say that math is discovered. Take the Fabbunaci (spelling, I know) sequence. That was always there, we just caught on. Same with Pythagorean theorem (spelt that correctly. )

Whether or not we ever discovered it, A squared times B squared equals C squared in a right triangle where C is the hypotenuse and A and B are the other two sides. We discovered that rule, we didn't invent it.

That's cool, kind of synchronous.
I just used the PT as an example when I posted this on another forum.
We think alike.