One of my favorite book jokes so far is courtesy Davey and Priestly: "...while computer scientists like their models without tops, mathematicians prefer them bottomless" Referring to the choice to augment posetal models of phenomena with maximal and minimal elements, of course.
I recently discovered your channel and i am very greatful of it. I am currently 16 years old and i am trying to self-study some set theory, so it feels great to know that there are other people on that path too. Good luck in your journey!
Also, to what you were saying at the end, Feyerabend has a BASED take: "there is no distinction between science, history of science, and philosophy of science." Also, there are extremely compelling philosophical arguments against the position into which you might be falling, which is known as conceptualism or psychologism; essentially, when the rhetorical dust clears, it seems that the only philosophically tenable positions are: 1. Abstract objects of some sort exist (people disagree as to which) 2. No abstract objects exist (in particular, numbers do not exist) This is because of essentially bulletproof arguments for the statement "if things like numbers existed, then they would be abstract objects that are non-spatial, non-temporal, and non-mental," given I believe by Frege.
After I checked out the vid, I was like Wait, how many mil views did this get? And dude, I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw it only had 600 views Seriously, great job bro the sound was nice, and the picture was nice Keep doing your thing. Can't wait to see where you go from here
