Everything is Math

First, we obviously don't have the technology to express everything mathematically (yet!), hence the use of the phrase "Imagine a world..." (where a world could mean a future state of humanity [ex. humans in the year 2845], or a utopia). I was also careful enough to use the word could and not can, while also saying " I think (in due time) everything could be expressed...", emphasis on "(in due time)". So technically, even if you can prove that even one thing can't be express mathematically today, you can't prove that it can't be expressed mathematically in the future, unless you're a time traveler :P Also, this is not about winning or losing, it is about exploring science on a deep level; there are no losers here (so that bit in your argument was unnecessary), everything we'll put on the table will be wild and philosophically speaking, abstract. (May I suggest you [my opponent] spend a little more time carefully reading before so viciously jumping in.) Now, let's get started. Let me begin by saying that though emotions are the inner workings of our heads, Sociology is not. Sociology as defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary is: "the science of society, social institutions, and social relationships; specifically : the systematic study of the development, structure, interaction, and collective behavior of organized groups of human beings" https://www.merriam-webster.com... It is (as so very clearly stated) a science; expanding on the definition (so that nothing's left out) , it is also: "the scientific analysis of a social institution as a functioning whole and as it relates to the rest of society". Maybe Sociology, as many other entities (entities here meaning sciences, beliefs, ideas, etc.), can't be currently numbered; that does not mean, however, that they can't be represented by mathematical formulas in the future. There's an area of Sociology called Mathematical Sociology that deals with the construction of social theories through Mathematics http://www.asanet.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... . Who's to say that in the next 50 years we won't be able to use mathematical formulas to carefully express/analyze human social behavior. We even have technology today capable of analyzing movement/behavior among groups of older people, separating those who suffer (or will suffer) from depression from those who do not (given mood data) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... . We are closer than ever before from deciphering human social constructs solely using Mathematics; given the advancements in Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence. So, it appears to me that you threw in Sociology without really doing research on the matter, so (no need for me to go any further) I'll move on to the next bit; emotions, and the idea of love. First, love. A debate has been going around for a long time on whether love should be considered a chemical reaction (as seen in Biology) or a profound emotional connection between two beings (in this case, beings will most likely be humans). So, before going any further, I'd like to ask you (my opponent) to be more specific with your answers (I'll assume you meant the idea of love [as seen in Psychology and Philosophy]). What is love? Can love be measured? Have you ever been in-love? The answer to these questions vary from person to person; as everyone has a different definition of love, and they can't be proven wrong unless they are defining love biologically. This would put love under a belief; since there are people in the world that do not believe in love (and again, you can't prove this to be wrong), and there's no authority capable of enforcing a definition of love upon a people. Love is not a science, it is not an emotion, it is not a theory; it is a belief, an idea, a feeling, it is abstract. Mathematics is too abstract, and through it, you are taught a set of tools that you can use to measure/calculate/define entities (abstract or not). We might not have the mathematical knowledge to express everything as a mere mathematical formula or number yet, but the idea is not far fetched when it comes to love. Same goes for emotions, even life and death. Though we might not have the technology, why should we restrain ourselves to what we know? Why should we stop evolving now? Let's go to the year 10000 BCE. If the humans living in the year 10000 BCE did not attempt to evolve technologically, we wouldn't be having this debate. By saying that everything could be expressed mathematically (through a formula, a number, even a theorem depending on what is to be expressed) I am opening the doors of technological advancement. I am pushing the boundaries of what's possible, and isn't that the goal of science? To understand how the universe works on every level (this includes everything IN the universe)? I chose Mathematics, simply because it is possible to express everything as a formula or a number, it might take years, even centuries, but it's possible. One hundred years ago, digital computers were theorized to one day exist in abundance, but they didn't have the technology, look at us now. Twenty years ago, we thought Quantum Computing to be impossible to recreate physically (though it had been theorized for decades), look at us now (FIY that was thanks to Mathematics :D and the collaboration between Computer Science and Quantum Physics). In your response you formulated some of the questions as to sound more philosophical, when that doesn't change the entity being expressed mathematically; for example, "What is the weight of insanity?" Alright, so you are trying to measure insanity as a mathematical formula, or it's weight. Both, again, COULD be expressed mathematically sometime in the future. For one, the human body is extremely communicative, everything from emotions, to morality is conveyed by the body in some way, through posture, body language, eye movement, facial expressions, vital signs, involuntary ticks, language, even position in four dimensional space (where you stand, and how long you've been standing there). These are methods that are currently being used to sort out the mentally stable from the insane. Psychology already does a good job as a science expressing some of the most famous mental illnesses biologically, in fact, no mental illness remains a mystery to us; the fact that we haven't found a cure for many of them simply implies that we do not have the technology to create the cures, and thus, more research is necessary (which is why we have so many charities towards Alzhemier's research, etc.) That being said, why is it so hard to believe that things such as insanity could not be expressed mathematically? Same goes for good vs evil. Advancements in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience has made it possible for us to build complex artificial constructs capable of inducing morality among computer programs. https://futureoflife.org... Can you imagine how easy it would be to code morality in computer programs if we had mathematical formulas or theorems backing it up? I think it's possible, and it all lies in the hands of science. Unless we blow ourselves up or a meteor destroys the earth, we'll get there eventually. "Many billions have experiences they regard as spiritual, potentially being in contact with the divine." I'm regarding spiritual experiences as psychological experiences, since I do not believe in the existence of an Absolute in our universe, so please try to keep religious concepts out of this discussion, as I will pay no attention to them. Religion falls under human belief and I touched on that when I talked about love (since religion is both an abstract and concrete concept). P.S.: Sorry it took me so long to answer, Critical Role was on yesterday ;D