# Mathematics and desire

This article here was honest as far as my original and past real world beliefs are concerned, but it showed not only a complete lack of respect and fear for the ultimate, and it was even the opposite, how the thoughts of a human must never be. I ultimately regret to have written this page here without even mentioning how ignorant and daring in a wrong way it was.

## Contents

- 1 Alternative titles for this page here
- 2 Pure mathematics and desire
- 3 Between mathematics and real-world desire
- 4 Or just or mainly real-world desire?
- 5 Desire and love
- 6 Conclusion
- 7 One day later: Oops, what did I write here yesterday?
- 8 2010-06-14
- 9 Kommentar vom Dezämbär 2011 / doz_11b7
- 10 Feedback would be welcome

## Alternative titles for this page here

Shall I just delete this page here completely?

- desire for mathematics?
- desiring mathematics
- mathematical desire
- reversed order "desire and mathematics" (the reversed order was my initial urge/preference, I really had to constrain myself to choose the more rational order with the word "mathematics" first, I even switched forth and back many times and was reluctant to finally put "mathematics" in the first place but finally I though about a really "cool blooded mathematician" with a desire for only mathematics and then knew that mathematics has to be first)

## Pure mathematics and desire

- The risks of mathematics especially when it comes to mathematical desire (might be related somehow to the "ecophagy argument" in the transhumanism article on Wikipedia for using up real-world resources in order to mathematically prove a statement, I have tried to find it on Wikipedia, but I was not able to find it on Wikipedia yet, neither in the transhumanism article nor in the ecophagy article nor in the Three laws or robotics article, but the idea was if I remember it correctly that in order to prove a mathematical statement, technological entities would significantly impede or damage the physical world by using too many resources for the mathematical prove. The solution might be to be patient and wait until another more sustainable way of proving has been developed. The challenge would consist in setting the appropriate limits when to proceed and when to wait.

## Between mathematics and real-world desire

- Mathematization as the only credible strategy to restrict one's own desire in the real world? (and what about UTSARAHL?)
- Mathematization also as the only way to "keep working" because of the fact that injustices in the real world might be that blatant that only the "belief" in mathematics or mathematization might be a motivation enough to "keep working" and sublime one's own unfulfilled desires?
- Some kind of psychological scaffold in order to cope with one's own feeling of inferiority when comparing oneself socially upward by thinking to oneself "hey, these people might have a significantly better life than me but they don't have the insight about what mathematics is or might be and all they do and experience is ultimately on a lower level than mathematics and being aware of what it is"? It is the idea that you somehow can influence your own perfection - although I am aware that I am not perfect at all and that "other people" (OK - who exactly are these other people?) share this opinion in a relatively painful way by preferring other people than me - by struggling for mathematics and influence on mathematics/mathematization in a better and more meaningful way than the other people who seem to have a better life. Some kind of abstract competition with the other people that you imagine in your inner world with a sense that you are more perfect and ultimately insurmountable because you have chosen the better option than them (but again, what is really the best option? ... hmm...., see the next section)? But I again have to ask the question what is with UTSARAHL, even in this context. However, wouldn't such a belief be just a pseudo-belief because mathematics would like that only be a scaffold or substitution or a "provisional crutch" until maybe one day, real world desires will be also fulfilled? And wouldn't in such a moment the situation become really problematic and one would end up in the next section just below?
- Isn't desire is more than just a self-centered, egoistic and hedonistic desire to be more fit or competitive than other people or entities in order to reach one's own hedonistic goals? Doesn't a desire for justice, truth, sustainability, UTSARA or intelligence (pure mathematics) exist too? Therefore, doesn't the desire to be more fit or competitive also imply the desire for these other values in being more fit and competitive in terms of these values and not just in a hedonistic way?
- Based on the sentence just above, I would have to ask: Is there some kind of desire hierarchy? First, and (really?) optional UTSARAHL. Then, secondly, mathematics. Then, thirdly, environmentally (in terms of "real world") (at least for the moment) more sustainable desires and fourthly environmentally less sustainable real-world desires. Another question (that is particularly important for me personally - at least at the moment) is how to motivate with the help of the mathematics-level to shift from the fourth to the third level - being motivated by mathematics (maybe that describes what philosowiki.org will be about). Maybe, with such a hierarchy, one is and remains motivated. And the only challenges remain in terms of what is or might be bordering mathematics on both sides and how to restrain or not restrain from leaving mathematics onto a particular side and if you leave it, why (voluntarily?, out of curiosity?, only partial belief in the upper "level"?). But are hierarchies useful? Such hierarchies aren't timeless, are they? And what does it mean to distinguish between a real world and an abstract world? On an ultimately mathematical level, does a distinction between a "real world" and an abstract world exist? Might the answer to these questions will be given by new, further developed and more mathematized ideologies of the future? But is it sufficient to just trust the future and the ideologies that it might develop then?
- Wouldn't there have to be something like a more immanent model without hierarchies that might be a little bit too authoritarian? Would UTSARAHL be the immanent model? Or mathematics? But in case of mathematics, would it just be sufficient to not go beyond? But then, aren't you in a hierarchy again if there is a "beyond"?

## Or just or mainly real-world desire?

Could an alternative and not really flattering title of this section here be: "Welcome to the exciting (ideological? real?) garbage bin of space and time/history..."? Or: "Enjoy your existence (life?) as an activist." (I am now even thinking to which extent these two sentences might even be true for the section(s) above...)

Actually another topic (or are there similarities?), I should not mix it up too much with the above considerations:

- If I have to be the moron (fool? jerk?) on philosowiki.org, I will at least try to make a link to mathematics. But the problem is that there will be a huge difference between purely mathematical desire and the real-world desire that I will write about there. To desire in the real world is not the same like desiring purely in mathematical terms, isn't it? And the problem might be that the gap might simply be too large to bridge, regardless of how hard you try. There is a gap, and it might be filled somehow and actually this page here is just an attempt to fill it. But what when the area below the gap is just too extensive/big/significant that the bridge/link is comparably too weak?

## Desire and love

If one talks about desire, one could also talk about love. And what would "love and mathematics" mean? Maybe I have just chosen the wrong title in the beginning, haven't I? And what might be the difference between love and desire? In the context of mathematics? And the difference between love and desire might indeed be one of the main topics on philosowiki.org.

## Conclusion

Doesn't this page reveal a lot? For example that, in terms of pure mathematics, I am not or not primarily on the purely mathematical track? That I am maybe really just a wannabe-mathematician (see I-would-like-to-be-mathematicians), and not one in the positive sense, but in the negative sense? How to change that to the positive sense?

## One day later: Oops, what did I write here yesterday?

Now, on 2010-06-13, one day later, I feel insecure:

Ideas that are now running through my head:

- how (I forgot what I originally wanted to write after the word "how")
- Yesterday, I wrote about something like an own wish to be or become insurmountable? Isn't that at best dislikable/uncongenial or even worse (also not compliant enough with the UTSARA value of peace)? one's own insurmountability wish as an excessive reaction to social frustration? (but that is definitively a philosowiki.org topic, it will not be discussed here more than already in this section)
- insurmountability of transparency and "truth" (and mathematics)?
- insurmountability? in terms of power? influence? social interconnectedness? opportunities for efficient, honest and "high-bandwidth" exchange? truth? formal and abstract existence? (mathematical / austere) beauty? attractiveness?
- an egocentric individual wish? an interconnected wish?
- maybe an interconnected wish in terms of ("positive" / beneficial interconnection to exactly those people one is envious of? - but isn't the source of envy the fact that one is rejected by them and at the same time they are on a higher level - but in which terms: "market value"? socially? ideologically?) connection to exactly the people one is envious?
- envy for more "successful entities" and desire?
- desire for mathematization?
- contempt for entities who are more "successful" despite a negligence for mathematics (and what about UTSARAHL)? or even endangering mathematization (see also below)? and what about one's own shortcomings?
- converting (extreme) desire into (extreme) intelligence (mathematics)?
- excessive insurmountability (wish)?
- exposing the truth about desire?
- desire and laziness (including laziness of thinking and struggling for intelligence) and lack of intelligence?
- wouldn't just infinitesimally closely or a measurable fraction (for example half) of the most attractive or insurmountable entity be sufficient?
- leaving one's own past behind. being content if one just has reduces the injustice significantly enough? because doesn't one entity always have to be the best and doesn't the "winning" entity change anyway? on the other hand, mathematics is actually the insurmountable ("winning"?) entity anyway, isn't it? so, are such questions futile?

- another topic: mathematization at risk and/or what is the ("long-term") likelihood of mathematization? (mind evolution and species survival in terms of time and UTSARA)? contempt against entities that might endanger mathematization?

- wouldn't it be better to ask only questions generally and especially on this page here?
- UTSARA compliance of this page here?
- honesty, insight as a goal for desire and mathematics?

- frustration as a source for creativity and "truth"? (subjecting an entity) to extreme/substantial/some deprivation and frustration in order to get information or the "truth"? and what about the reaction of that entity afterwards?
- simply the challenge to remain moderate? (moderation also as an UTSARA value)

- and finally: how dislikable/uncongenial are some sentences on this page here? UTSARA implications?

## 2010-06-14

Note on 2010-06-14: How inconceivable is mathematics ultimately with "desire"? Aren't these two "things"/concepts entirely different "things"/concepts? But if "desire" exists, why was desire permitted or why did it emerge/evolve? How (complex) would the concept of "desire" (have to) be mathematically defined/described/expressed? Does mathematics need desire (or love?) in order to be "achieved" in a perfectly mathematized state?

## Kommentar vom Dezämbär 2011 / doz_11b7

Diä Siitä da isch än extreem liäblosä Artikäl, dä liäblosischti uf dä ganzä Wäbsiitä. Im Mai/Juni 2010 bin - soo druf gsii, das isch mini/- innäri Haltig gsii, än enormi Fruschtratioon. - han mi unbekannt und unerkannt gfüült, nid aghöört. Drum han - no immär ä Wuät uf erfolgriichi Lüüt ghaa. Dä Titäl daa zeigt/beinhaltät abär äs ganz zentraals Probleem vo minärä Ideologii bzw. Ideeäwält in ämä andärä, generellärä Konteggscht: Wiä chan Übereergiiz (generellä Übereergiiz) vähindäräd wärdä? Äs mues vähindäräd werdä, dass äs (s'Schtrebä) niä guet gnueg isch. Mee chan - nid schriibä im Momänt. Offline han - abär no mee gschribä. Vilicht füäg - das dänn mit Koupi-Peischt na ii.

## Feedback would be welcome

And please write me an e-mail to moc.liamg -ta- rennatrigsakul if you have any comments about this page here, these ideological "linking/bridging attempt pages" are probably the most/more interesting pages.