I certainly lean towards Nominalism as it suits working with computer databases and such very well. [in computers, it’s ALL nominalism. Turn off the computer and there goes existence]
Plus, nominalism is enshrined in Church’s untyped lambda calculus with the “anonymous lambda function” which is used and reused but has no existence outside of the function it’s used in while it’s being used and it has no identity outside of it for it only has identity during the function, which is hidden while it runs, although the anonymous function can be copied into a function with a name, but the anonymous function still remains anonymous and reused
—
It leads to situations where TRUE=FALSE is fine so plus that and other reasons, he came up with a TYPED Lambda calculus, and many other typed Lambda Calculi followed. They were all very powerful but none quite so powerful as untyped lambda calculus.
Flash forward from the 1930s to the 2020s, 80+ years later, and programmers battle out converting between types. Type conversions lead to catastrophic errors and slip in really easily. Anytime you enter data, if it’s the wrong type and slips in, a whole app, program, website, system, etc can get corrupted and come tumbling down in seconds.
—
I’m neither a philosopher nor a mathematician but I’m familiar with some parts of computer science, which merges the two somewhat
-
Like
==
As far as non-computer areas, am I a nominalist?
I don’t know. That’s been a tougher one.
—