[wmal]

> You're taking a distinct philosophical stance, but you're also being unnecessarily dismissive by claiming other stances "miss the point".

I read my comment again and I was surprised, as I did not intend this tone. I’m sorry for being dismissive and for generalising too much about mathematicians.

Could you elaborate or point me to a formulation of the “language of the universe” argument you mentioned that avoids mentioning quantum physics? I don’t understand quantum physics and I’d like to avoid falling for the quantum physics fallacy [1]

[1]: https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Quantum...

[crazygringo]

No worries! Just wanted to make sure you were aware of other perspectives.

And a good place in general to start is always Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_mathematics

And none of this has anything to do with the "quantum physics fallacy" at all. Philosophically, it's simply an argument about the most basic physical understanding of our universe, and right now that happens to be quantum physics.