[kcl]

> numbers (and other sorts of mathematics) do not pre-exist reality. Numbers are abstractions of regularities we see in nature.

This is an open and ancient question. I don't suppose to have the answer. I will say, the case for mathematics pre-existing is stronger than what you refute here.

[nathan_compton]

You're right, of course, that this is an open question. But the posted article saunters about the fields of an incredibly deep question by glibly asserting idealism about mathematical structures. It is an awfully weak foundation upon which to build an answer to such a fundamental question.

It is _at least_ plausible that numbers supervene upon existence and not the other way around, which makes the entire exercise in the article seem suspect in its presentation, at the very least.

Would you _really_ say that the case for mathematical idealism is that strong? The Philpapers survey seems to suggest philosophers are approximately evenly split on this question (idealists at 39%, nominalists at 38%).