>>11448551>100 percent finiteNot really.
Wildberger's major position is that ZF set theory is a trash way to represent the foundations of all math. It's from there he argues for computability and finitism in SOME math, but not all fields of math, just the foundations that hold everything together. He argues that because Discrete Math is finite, it has seen the most advances over the years because it's math done correctly unlike the leaky abstractions we've created everywhere else.
Wildberger also despises philosophy math, where you aimlessly ponder stupid shit and try and shove it into mathematics. He thinks real numbers are shitty invention and instead you can just patch existing number systems instead of stapling some infinite series to the number line and trying to force it. His Trig views make sense too, put everything in the realm of linear algebra and use vectors for geometry not awful transcendental functions.
Again Wildberger doesn't say all math must be finite he says the foundations of math must be in order to not be a house of cards, and it's perfectly fine to have your own abstract branch that is entirely based on ZF set theory just don't use it for the foundations of all math.
That said I don't agree with his shilling of the 'Babylon tablets' or any of that bullshit
