Thanks for clearing me up. Ok that’s interesting. And does very much speak to OP

I can immediately grasp a major support of the position, in that principia mathematica are self - evident/supporting/emerging (ie axioms and theorums), so yeah thats pretty strong reality.

But…

Im a way, doesn’t the nature of a “pure mathematics reality” indeed sit apart from “our” reality, like (how) can it exist (in some way) without a world?

So IS that strong support for a type of dualism?

Is the old joke “God exists and he is a mathematician” valid in that respect?

I will also “bite” with a my attempt at a philosophical answer to OP

Short answer: No

Why?

?What is a game?

!Disproved Plato’s Pure Forms!

(and over 2 millenia of western philosophical thinking based on that crap (essential to most dualism), that even many of P’s students wisely wouldn’t buy, back in the day)

Is a game… Collaborative or Competative Fun or serious Rules absolute or negotiable Etc etc

While this is an extreme case, its a problem for some aspects of many/most/all relevant observational schemas

Clearly there is no “ideal” game definition, and thus can never be an “absolute” agreement as to what is or isn’t ABSOLUTELY a game.

However, for a given sub-culture (of similar biological and experienced beings) there can indeed be quite extensive agreement, and only a few debates, as to what is a game.

So, for now, I will take this position to OPs OQ.

That we will not be finding an objective reality, that any such schema will have problems, but in as much as there is close alignment of observers, there indeed tends to be sufficient agreement regarding many things, that a subjective experience imperfectly becomes a shared reality.

While I like OPs OQ allowing existence of objective reality,

As far as I am aware (please prove me wrong) there is not any “philosophical proof” of such.

Most philosophy claiming such either takes it, or required axioms, a-priori or uses chains of logic that absolutely require unproven/unprovable claims.

Often ascociated/required/requiring dualism, which also has serious “proof” issues.

As with the OPs OQ, I would like it if those claiming an absolute position provide reasoning, because frankly, I think it might be a cultural/biological delusion, ironically resulting from the inescapable nature of mediation by the subject (self).

Yes, but

The “actual” mathematics (in as much as we can verify our models through scientific experimentation)

are “absolutely subjective” in that (for instance)

At large scale, relativity effects are so great as to make order and locations of events subordinate to an observers reference frame

And at small scale, (example again) Uncertainty Principle makes events “fuzzy” ie (somewhat) indeterminate.

Now in both those cases, yes we have the mathematics “down” so hypothetically we can acount what an individual observer may “see” but

Practically speaking, a total accounting of this would seemingly require a computer more complex than the universe itself.

Love how the religeous claim certainty that THEIR instructions from God, and they all seem to justify their “grandad’s” values as to when to break their own principles.

Ie:

Love thy neighbour but MY NEIGHBOR got a Windmill so I should be allowed to arson!

If a thief takes your cloak, also give him your coat… but no socialism for anyone I dont know, they r all lazy bums

Etc etc

No chance any of this is u know who, or maybe just your ego? Oh no, you know cause a gut feeling and old folks said so

In WWII, experimental weapons:

Since cats reach their terminal velocity after just aprox 3 stories fall, and are therefore better than likely to survive a drop from any height…

Allied Air Command recruited vets for the war effort, had them surgically plant incendiary bombs on timers in stray cats.

They were then airdropped over German cities, whence they would hide in flammable refuse, as cats are wont to do.

When the synchronized fuses later went off, multiple starting points created a massive firestorm, killing 10s of thousands.

Meow

If you get a choice between regular Heaven, and Pie Heaven, choose Pie Heaven. It might be a trick, but if its not, mmm boy!

Wait till they start dropping dehydrated dinosaurs, just add water…

Watch “Chernobyl” by HBO, if u old enough to remember that, at the time it was all lies and cover ups.

I did a deep dive into reactors in general and concluded:

Even with “better, safer (theory 100% safe)” reactor designs are vulnerable to fail (sometimes catastrophically) given

1)external(Social, energy) pressure: 3Mile, Chernobyl, Fuck-You-Shima, all were entirely preventable BUT given “social” pressures (whether capitalist, communist or zibatsu) there is always pressure to do things “cheap”

2)all reactor designs, when off line, need (sometimes up to 2 years!) of cooling to avoid disasters. This means when you wanna turn off, they are massive long term energy vampires. Thusly: all reactors, given social collapse, where there is not freely available staff and surplus power, red line, sometimes to meltdown. So plagues, war, catastrophe, social breakdown… all over the world…

3)“safe” reactors are designed so for 50 years. They are then “unsafe” but it takes years and billions$ to shut them down (and you need to replace capacity!). A vast number of original power plants are past or passing threshold. To my knowledge, no political system pre banked the money and resources to shut and replace. So we are just patching cracks, and operating less safely (there will be a bunch of these disasters in next decades)

?What kind of idiot lights a fire that you can not extinguish, and can not leave unattended!

Watch “All watched over by machines of loving grace” BBC, Curtis; might be also on some dread YouTube. The cow portholes were part of (unexpected) scientific disproof of the trite popular wisdom of “Ballance of Nature.” Whole series is a trip, if maybe a bad one.

deleted by creator