Hello, I am baffled to see that Amartya Sen is regarded "highly important" in this WikiProject. Please ping me while you reply, I don't watch this page. THE NEWImmortalWizard(chat) 10:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
WP 1.0 Bot Beta
Hello! Your WikiProject has been selected to participate in the WP 1.0 Bot rewrite beta. This means that, starting in the next few days or weeks, your assessment tables will be updated using code in the new bot, codenamed Lucky. You can read more about this change on the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team page. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 06:47, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Anti-consumerism until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 02:44, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
-Change from: These terms are used with respect to reasoning (epistemology) to distinguish "necessary conclusions from first premises" (i.e., what must come before sense observation) from "conclusions based on sense observation" which must follow it.
^PhilPapers, Metaphysics > Objects > Identity, Identity, Edited by Chad Carmichael (Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis), About this topic,Summary: Identity is sameness: the relation that holds between each thing and itself, and never holds between two things. Most philosophical issues about identity concern the relationship between identity and other important concepts: time, necessity, personhood, composition (parthood), indiscernibility, and vagueness. In addition to these issues, some have suggested that identity is not absolute, but relative, so that we may say two things are the same person or statue, but not the same simpliciter. Finally, there are questions about whether there must always be informative criteria of identity that settle questions about when identity holds or fails to hold...
So I just ran across this article, and I'm completely at a loss what to make of it. First, I'm unsure whether or not this is even a notable topic (it maybe looks like this is restricted to just a few academics, and I'm not sure if that's enough). Second, if it is notable enough for an article, I think the title needs to be changed – currently it seems to suggest that this is some sort of type of math or field within math, but this clearly isn't the case. Rather, it seems that the actual topic is more about the study of math as a discipline through a postmodernist lens. And finally, there's possibly some WP:OR/WP:SYN issues going on, but I don't feel comfortable enough with the topic to really be sure. So anyone who'd like to take a swing at this would be welcome. (Notifying at WT:WPM as well). –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:05, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't know enough about it to throw the entire thing out, but the use of Popper and Wittgenstein as "notable figures" really does seem suspicious (and a lot like WP:OR, as you say--or even more misleading), so I encourage anyone reading this with a background on either one of those figures to take a look as well. Note, though, that their inclusion as figures in this school of thought is tied to a scholarly article (that I can't access), not their own works, which is the only thing that keeps me from removing it right now. Seems like a minority/fringe viewpoint, but I am not 100% sure. Political philosophy is more my area of interest.--MattMauler (talk) 16:03, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Hmm, I've definitely read a bit in the philosophy-of-mathematics literature about "humanistic" interpretations of mathematical truth, and my guess is that there's enough to warrant an article describing the works of Reuben Hersh and others. But this article makes grand claims about what all postmodernists think about mathematics, which is unsupportable. I'd be inclined to WP:TNT the whole thing and redirect it to Philosophy of mathematics, which already has heaps of words about social constructivism, fictionalism, etc. XOR'easter (talk) 17:56, 27 March 2019 (UTC)