Certainty in mathematics is based on the appropriate rule for operations such as multiplication and addition. Therefore, what is the certainty in learning, as well as not conducting research, regarding methodical regulations. the basis of truth is the ontic state, the natural relationship.
Math is deductive. If the argument is sound, we can be certain that the conclusion is true.
Science, and many other methods of truth seeking, use inductive and abductive arguments. Deductive arguments are nice, but we have to first agree that the argument is sound before we can arrive at certain deduced truth.
Premises in inductive arguments don't necessitate the conclusion. Instead, they create a level of contingency in the conclusion.
There is not going to be the same kind of certainty in induction as deduction. It's unrealistic. Demanding deductive certainty from inductive arguments is like demanding a 747 to take on the job of a nuclear sub. It's not what they are for.
Further, because a deductive argument's truthfulness requires a consensus, the certainty of the conclusion is founded on the contingency of its premises. So, we cannot even be certain of the certainty in deduction. This kind of absolute certainty never existed. It's all abstract thinking.
Anyway, I think this what you were talking about. Sorry if I missed the mark.3w
Mathematics is an adult version of the “what-if game” we played as children – "What if ...?” – Mathematics is not concerned with telling us how the World is but, instead, is concerned with telling us how the World might be.2w
