I suggest that zero is a cognitive crutch, a way for humans to grasp the concept of absence, but not an objective existence in itself. By using zero, we're essentially creating a placeholder for something that's inherently difficult to comprehend – the absence of quantity or being.
This would resonate with the idea that mathematics is a human construct, designed to help us make sense of the world. In this context, zero serves as a tool to facilitate our understanding, rather than an inherent aspect of reality.
This also raises questions about the limits of language and cognition. If we rely on zero as a crutch, what does that reveal about our capacity to understand the world without quantification? Can we truly grasp the concept of absence without resorting to a symbol or concept like zero?
