You have described a clock.
Maybe it's useful as a tool for producing some kind of machine or programming or whatever, but without some kind of context to explain what you are trying to do beyond the obvious, the result is still 4.
No, I have not described a clock. Clocks don't perform operations.
Context has been given, but you're cherry picking what you want to use to pretend that your reasoning abilities somehow make you superior. They don't. Your reasoning is heavily flawed, much more so than HM's appeal to emotion. He's trying to learn. Toxic and you don't. You're literally equivalent to him (Toxic) and only accepting what you already believe, while running away from arguments you clearly aren't equipped to hold.
Whole point of the finite fields was to demonstrate that objectivity as you seem to understand it is nonsense. No more than a result of evolution simplifying the non-objective reality for the sake of energy conservation.
Call math a language if you want, doesn't change anything. If it is a language that describes reality then it is reality you are dealing with. And with that I'm done with this topic.
English describes reality. Extremely poorly.
And again, you've completely ignored the fact that all of Math starts from assumptions. Assumptions which are de facto subjective. You can be "done" and pout all you want, but to use your words, that won't change reality. And if you want to go the "reason" and "objectivity" route, then my experience in Mathematics certainly gives me more authority to speak on this topic than you will ever achieve given my head-start. And the fact remains, Mathematics is a subjective language. Literally a language that is subject to the capacity of human thought. Which is self-evidently limited in scope.
You can't even begin to make an argument with similar rigour to that of a Mathematical proof in English. As such, you have sufficiently demonstrated your complete (current) lack of capacity for understanding the nature of it.
You clearly don't have your emotions in control either, otherwise you would've conceded that your reasoning is insufficient rather than becoming defensive. And here we go full circle to emotion/reasoning being a spectrum that is optimized with equal parts of both. Each to keep the other in check.
Poll
