In an ongoing discussion with hazel and others in another thread, some agreement has been reached that conceptual elements of mathematics (and in a related relationship, geometry) are things we discover rather than invent, such as circles and their mathematical properties.
That discussion, IMO, could benefit by discussing what is meant by the term “Platonic Realm”. It seems to me that this issue turns on a very simple question; do we live in a universe that is matter-centric or consciousness-centric? What is the primary, driving force of the physical universe – mind or matter?
IMO, quantum experimentation over the past 150 or so years makes the case that consciousness/mind is at least one of the fundamental aspects of even material existence. When we peer down into the subatomic realm, we do not find indivisible bits of matter; we don’t even find motes of “energy” that have objective characteristics. What we find are potentials that seem to be directly connected to and affected by consciousness and observation.
It seems rather simple to me to understand this in terms of the Platonic Realm being, in fact, the substrate upon which the physical world is built, and that is the reason the physical world reveals logical principles and mathematical behaviors wherever we look. If our minds/consciousness exist independent of matter within and as part of that platonic substrate, we have access to all sorts of Platonic Realm information, some of which we may not even know how it is applicable to or manifests in our physical world experience yet.
I don’t know of any “matter-centric” perspectives that can model-explain these discoveries and relationships. Perhaps someone would like to try?
[Again – I have zero tolerance for mocking, insinuations, examining motivations, etc. in my threads. I don’t claim to be fair about my moderation practices, so complaints about it will be deleted. Tread lightly, be FRIENDLY, if you can’t respond without sniping then don’t, show respect. We are discussing a topic, not trying to find out what’s wrong with the participants. – WJM]