Posted: Mar 31, 2018 3:07 am
by Thommo
More seriously: "value" is an undefined term, there's no way to answer the question without putting one's own interpretation in.

If "value" means (a) can be used in some metaphysical argument and (b) have value commensurate to that metaphysical argument, then I'm going to say no, in fact by that metric no mathematical proof has value since metaphysics has no value.

But all I've done is changed my valuation scheme and punted the can down the road - it now comes down to the "value" I place on metaphysics (which is nil, and negative for the sorts of things James calls metaphysics). I suppose we could debate whether "nil" and "negative" values are values though, that might while away the wee hours.