Thanks again for taking the time for a thoughtful reply. I am aware that I'm using terminology very loosely, and I omit many details that may be required for a full understanding.
With respect to the full force of the argument: I assume that the "regularity" stems from the physical systems that make up our brain. Just as replication through DNA offers some stability in life, the shape of our neurons (and perhaps the dynamics of space-time, and the laws of physics) offer some regularity in the chaotic universe.
In my view, this regularity is but an accidental blip in the totality of existence, but to us, who cannot observe the rest of the chaos, it seems fundamental -- which from the universal context, it isn't.
The biggest problem that I cannot get around is that I somehow assume this chaos exists, and allows for things to exist inside of it. I do not know how to provide arguments for that, other than the negative one that it seems highly unlikely that "there is something rather than nothing". Likeliness, and the fact that I can define these abstract concepts, only make sense in the realm of human thought, so I am sort of stuck in a recursive loop there.
With regards to the second part of your reply, again it is us humans who do the discerning. It is an emergent property of our brain (or possibly of slightly simpler, but still rather complex "discrete switches") that we can discern things. In the underlying universe of total chaos, there is no context, no logic, no measure to discern things.
So, the source of order does arise through physical constructs, that happen to have a certain structure that allows observation. It is humans, mammals, octopuses, computers, that can use this universal form of observation to process input, and then do observation as we know it. So I suppose my idea is some kind of realism, but my reality is nothing more than pure and utter, unbounded chaos. And we live in some corner of that.
The grand claim is that mathematics is nothing more than the result of some self-observing shapes in the chaos that is existence.
Again, I feel sorry for all the readers who try to make sense of all my overloaded concepts. I wish I had the skills to write down my thoughts more rigorously. Or perhaps someone can save me a lot of time [1].
With respect to the full force of the argument: I assume that the "regularity" stems from the physical systems that make up our brain. Just as replication through DNA offers some stability in life, the shape of our neurons (and perhaps the dynamics of space-time, and the laws of physics) offer some regularity in the chaotic universe.
In my view, this regularity is but an accidental blip in the totality of existence, but to us, who cannot observe the rest of the chaos, it seems fundamental -- which from the universal context, it isn't.
The biggest problem that I cannot get around is that I somehow assume this chaos exists, and allows for things to exist inside of it. I do not know how to provide arguments for that, other than the negative one that it seems highly unlikely that "there is something rather than nothing". Likeliness, and the fact that I can define these abstract concepts, only make sense in the realm of human thought, so I am sort of stuck in a recursive loop there.
With regards to the second part of your reply, again it is us humans who do the discerning. It is an emergent property of our brain (or possibly of slightly simpler, but still rather complex "discrete switches") that we can discern things. In the underlying universe of total chaos, there is no context, no logic, no measure to discern things.
So, the source of order does arise through physical constructs, that happen to have a certain structure that allows observation. It is humans, mammals, octopuses, computers, that can use this universal form of observation to process input, and then do observation as we know it. So I suppose my idea is some kind of realism, but my reality is nothing more than pure and utter, unbounded chaos. And we live in some corner of that.
The grand claim is that mathematics is nothing more than the result of some self-observing shapes in the chaos that is existence.
Again, I feel sorry for all the readers who try to make sense of all my overloaded concepts. I wish I had the skills to write down my thoughts more rigorously. Or perhaps someone can save me a lot of time [1].
[1] https://xkcd.com/386/