[6d0debc071]

> It is [arbitrary]. We invented the arabic numerals because...

Then it's not arbitrary; chosen at random or on a fleeting whim, without reference to a reason or system. It was invented to fill a specific need based on certain limitations.

[Dylan16807]

But it is arbitrary; subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion.

[6d0debc071]

I doubt many people would agree that you were doing maths if you made your rules and symbols up randomly.

It's true enough that mathematicians define certain things certain ways, but they generally have reasons for doing so that tie into other aspects of whatever system they're working within at the time, or with particular areas of investigation: 'If I alter this rule, or make this assumption, what does it do to the system as a whole? Does it let me find some answer more easily than another way? Does it preserve consistency/truth values? Under what conditions?'

That's far from being dependent solely on their individual whim, the decisions they make in that regard, and the answers they will get, are strongly influenced by the form the system has taken and it's uses and limitations.

Of course if you want to maintain that maths as a whole is arbitrary because you could make whatever you liked up and say you were doing maths... well, I won't argue you're not, but it seems to me you've made the objection general enough that it could safely be ignored. Anyone doing something purposeful could simply assert: 'Your's, maybe. We're trying to do our-maths-goal.' And move on.