So, you’re talking about things you can, basically, imagine.
Yes, all the logically consistent systems we can imagine, and more. (See the Godel analogy above for “and more”.)
In which sense do “ungraspable maps” exist, but herds of rainbow unicorns gallivanting on clouds do not?
You...can’t imagine logically coherent systems with rainbow unicorns on clouds?
Keep in mind, we’re making distinctions between “real tangible reality” and “the space of logically coherent systems”. Your ad-absurdum works by using the word “exist” to confound those two, in a “tree falls in the forest” sort of manner. I specifically used the word “platonic” hoping to separate those ideas. It’s merely an inconvenience of language that we don’t have the words to distinguish the tautological “reality” and “existence” of 1+1=2 from the reality of “look, there’s a thing over there”. People say “in Integers, there exists an odd number between every even number” but it’s not that sort of “existence”.
Yes, all the logically consistent systems we can imagine, and more. (See the Godel analogy above for “and more”.)
You...can’t imagine logically coherent systems with rainbow unicorns on clouds?
Keep in mind, we’re making distinctions between “real tangible reality” and “the space of logically coherent systems”. Your ad-absurdum works by using the word “exist” to confound those two, in a “tree falls in the forest” sort of manner. I specifically used the word “platonic” hoping to separate those ideas. It’s merely an inconvenience of language that we don’t have the words to distinguish the tautological “reality” and “existence” of 1+1=2 from the reality of “look, there’s a thing over there”. People say “in Integers, there exists an odd number between every even number” but it’s not that sort of “existence”.