who was the animal again?
puffledick
>>65112149
I think it was the angels
You're living on it
man been an animal since day innit
Man is the animal who walks on four legs as a child, on two when he's fully grown and on three when he's old and needs a stick.
That's the full quote. Seems nobody knows that.
zeper
stumbled upon this
found the answers a bit funny
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090929045937AAPZKGi
>>65114051
those answers are cringe
>angles are mathematical
Yeah no shit
>>65114164
Angles aren't mathematical. Angles simply are. Math is just a tool we use to describe them.
Man.
>>65112149
>Our fathers and mothers have
>They have failed to release us
If angels are bestial then aren't they the animal too?
>>65113262
thanks
>>65114194
This sounds like a thought I'd come up with when baked off my ass
>>65114051
>stumbled
too soon
>>65112149
a miserable pile of secrets
>>65114194
nah. math isn't a human construction. it's a universal principle. sure we give numbers names, but numbers exist whether they have names or not. look at the golden ratio. it's everywhere in nature
>>65114747
>Things exist in nature that we can describe using math
>Muh scientism
Wow you're cool
The Nape of Aples
>>65114828
..ok but i'm still right.
and it's not simply "things exist in nature that we can describe using math" everything in nature can be described using math.
>>65115031
>everything in nature can be described using math.
Yes but the nature comes before the math. In most cases (ie all of physics) the math is just a very good (or sometimes pretty shitty) abstraction. What you're saying is like saying language isn't a human construct because we can say leaves are green and rain is wet.
The mathematization of nature is by and large a fucking mistake. Put down your Lawrence Krauss book and read Husserl dingus.
>>65112228
Nono, angels are bestial and mathematical we covered this in like fifth grade.
>>65115132
i haven't read either, but i'll look into them. i'm just speaking from what seems like common sense. how can you be sure that nature came before math? it seems to me like math is responsible for the formation of the universe.
the universe has a set of foundational rules that govern the way that everything behaves (like gravity, or inertia). as humans, we still don't fully understand them yet, but that doesn't mean they're not there.
we wouldn't have planets or solar systems if certain laws of physics didn't determine the way that space debris clusters together.
