realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OT] Why "Computer Science" - was Re: Packed Encoding

To: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
Subject: Re: [OT] Why "Computer Science" - was Re: Packed Encoding
From: "Theodore H. Smith" <delete at elfdata dot com>
Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 21:57:52 +0000
Delivered-to: listarchive at realsoftware dot com
Delivered-to: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
References: <mailman dot 10912 dot 1204310217 dot 9216 dot realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
> On Feb 29, 2008, at 11:35 AM, Theodore H. Smith wrote:
>
>> Maths is just a... dysfunctional version of logic.
>> It's unwieldy, and... impractical for real life purposes.
>
>
> Math is impractical for real life purposes? Wow. I'll have to remember
> that the next time I get pulled over for speeding.
> "Sorry, officer, but your use of math (my speed > speed limit) proves
> nothing. I'm outta here!"


Thanks for all the general denial and insanity and "it's good to have  
the old Theo back" stuff from you guys.

Now anyhow, back to Brad Rhine,

OK. That's just silly. You are deliberately misunderstanding me.

A few thousand years ago, some old Greek proved, using logic, that the  
world is round. He did not use maths, he used logic. I think his name  
was Aristotle. Some other Greeks proved that the skin has holes in it.  
Again, using logic, not maths.

Now, just because it is not expressed in terms of algebra, does not  
mean it is not logic.

What they proved was perfectly true. And perfect logic. I'd like to  
see you prove that the world is round using maths. It's just awkward.

In facts, maths is just a limited subset of logic. Some guy called  
Peano managed to define maths in terms of logic. That is a good start.

This puts logic as the root of all things, not maths.

Now, what you are doing, is saying that just because a subset is  
useful in a subset of situations... my idea is nonsense. That is a  
nonsense rebuttal. What about the majority of situations where logic  
is more appropriate but maths is not?

What you don't realise, is that this ENTIRE message of mine, is logic.  
try to express this conversation in maths... you'll fail. What  
equation describes what I'm saying?

Most likely instead, you'll ignore what I say, miss the point,  
convince yourself that you are right. Despite that I made the point so  
clearly and perfectly.

--
http://elfdata.com/plugin/
"String processing, done right"


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>