[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] a minus times a plus

Actually, I was wondering just the opposite of


The issue for me is why the Western civilization prioritizes (and then
mathematizes) social relations described in the Arabic wisdom.
If I look at a number of the intriguing 'rationalizations' Mike's question generated, I seem to see a tendency to, in a sense, almost anthropomorphize mathematics (hope that makes sense as I don't quite know what the right word is). Social relations don't give rise to mathematics, but mathematics seems to give, perspectivally, a rise to social relations. In fact the West goes a step further in prioritizing the digital over the analogue as your example shows. A number of people have taken this 'mathematizing' (which goes far beyond the problematic of double negations) up in recent years. I think recently of Michael Eldred and Stuart Eden (and, of corse, there is Heidegger and Lachterman among others) and Aristotle is very important in this regard as he is deals with similar questions as regards 'real' and mathematics. It is possibly worth wondering how the Arabs were contaminated by all this as they were a major transmitter of Greek mathematics to the West and elsewhere. 

Ed Wall

On Apr 29, 2009, at 4:44 PM, Eugene Matusov wrote:


Dear everybody--
In response to Mike's profound inquiry of why a minus times a minus is a plus, I was thinking that it is a mathematical model of the Arabic wisdom 
that "an enemy of my enemy is my friend." Of course, the latter is not
always true -- we have plenty of examples when enemy of our enemy is still 
our enemy (or just indifferent) and, thus, for these types of social
relations, the mathematical model of (-1) x (-1) =1 does not work. Just consider, for an example, the relations among the US, Al-Qaida, and Saddam 
Hussein.

The issue for me is why the Western civilization prioritizes (and then
mathematizes) social relations described in the Arabic wisdom. One answer is because "the real world" works according to these social relations (i.e., 
the social relations is just an example of the truth out there). An
alternative explanation is that the Western civilization can afford and might be even benefit from imposing these social relations on "the real 
world" that by itself is indifferent to any social relations (and thus
mathematical models). Any other explanations?

What do you think?

Eugene


-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca- bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] 
On Behalf Of Ng Foo Keong
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 12:23 PM
To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] a minus times a plus

Is Mathematics _merely_ socially constructed, or is there something
deeper and inevitable?
I think this deserves a new thread, but I couldn't manage to start one. 
Let me try to draw out and assemble the line of discussion that spun
off from the "a minus times a plus" thread.

In her inaugural post to xcma, Anna Sfard about talked "rules
of the mathematical game" among other things.

Then Jay Lemke said:-

...
I think it's important, however, to see, as Anna emphasizes,
that there is a certain "arbitrariness" involved in this, or
if you like it better: a freedom of choice. Yes, it's
structure-and-agency all over again! Structure determines that
some things fit into bigger pictures and some don't, but
agency is always at work deciding which pictures, which kind
of fit, which structures, etc. And behind that values, and
culture, and how we feel about things.


-----
Then I (Ng Foo Keong) said:-


regarding structure and agency, arbitrariness:-
i think now it's time for me to pop this question that has been
bugging me for some time.  i am convinced that mathematics is
socially constructured, but i am not so convinced that mathematics
is _merely_ socially constructured.  if we vary across cultures
and different human activities, we might find different ways
in which patterns and structure can be expressed and yet we might
find commonalities / analogies.  the question i am asking is:
is maths just a ball game determined by some group of nerds who
happen to be in power and dominate the discourse, or is there some
invariant, something deeper in maths that can transcend and unite
language, culture, activity .... ?


Foo Keong,
NIE, Singapore

-----
Then Ed Wall said:-


Ng Foo Keong
As regards your question about mathematics being socially
constructed, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by
mathematics or what kind of evidence would convince you it wasn't.
Suppose I said that there was evidence for innate subtizing.

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 4043 (20090429) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4043 (20090429) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com


_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca




_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca