Content deleted Content added
m →Lead change suggestions: Small elaboration |
→Lead change suggestions: nonconstructive proofs |
||
Line 98:
:::My main objection is that you introduce a confusion between [[object (philosophy)]] and [[object (mathematics)]]. This is an article on mathematics, not on philosophy of mathematics. Also, almost every sentence is misleading or wrong in the context of mathematics of the 21th century. [[User:D.Lazard|D.Lazard]] ([[User talk:D.Lazard|talk]]) 19:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
::::The first point is a fair objection, that I will respond to in a moment, however, the second point "almost every sentence is misleading or wrong in the context of mathematics of the 21th century," I'm looking over this and, apart from the second-to-last sentence on Russell, I fail to see how any other sentence could be considered "wrong". [[User:Farkle Griffen|Farkle Griffen]] ([[User talk:Farkle Griffen|talk]]) 01:24, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
:There is a third type of mathematical object, although it is anethema to some camps; an object whose existence is not asserted by an axiom or shown by a construction, but has been proven by nonconstructive proofs. Some of these involve the [[axion of choice]]. -- [[User:Chatul|Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul]] ([[User talk:Chatul|talk]]) 13:15, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
| |||