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

*To*: <ablunden@mira.net>*Subject*: [Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics*From*: anna sfard <sfard@netvision.net.il>*Date*: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 15:18:07 +0200*Cc*: "'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>*In-reply-to*: <545F65C8.3000409@mira.net>*List-archive*: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l>*List-help*: <mailto:xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu?subject=help>*List-id*: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l.mailman.ucsd.edu>*List-post*: <mailto:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>*List-subscribe*: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu?subject=subscribe>*List-unsubscribe*: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu?subject=unsubscribe>*References*: <CAGVMwbUV9Jdf2XpAshWE0dCNcT1kHRTrpxGy=Ci2M3xR9N3rhQ@mail.gmail.com> <006101cffa79$8f551b60$adff5220$@net.il> <XZMu5rEUDHML08mmjLrVdv=XYjg@mail.gmail.com> <CAG1MBOEPoJ1e8oxrqePe8aFXZMu5rEUDHML08mmjLrVdv=XYjg@mail.gmail.com> <010f01cffaac$6ba77810$42f66830$@net.il> <CAG1MBOH4AD6+f09LQMLUWfnz0RjcRVuAsOLi-0sMbyGLPMFSxQ@mail.gmail.com> <007601cffb23$f57ada10$e0708e30$@net.il> <CAG1MBOHCrsdJ4O-636iyHE-GN=594FrzoKW_yE+gRzj=_4cvGQ@mail.gmail.com> <545E0AC5.6000007@mira.net> <CAG1MBOGsDVDgt9wWu9tPK5Z4Ba3Otps1pDPjO=M1bVDU2tOU6A@mail.gmail.com> <A4099CC2-FF13-43BB-B223-6B5980895445@gmail.com> <AB7FDEB6-EB69-4833-A1E2-7A2C1DDC1FAF@manchester.ac.uk> <86562269-9D51-4B30-AE99-B2F99428B27B@uniandes.edu.co> <545EB2EE.7090206@mira.net> <D0843342.4BFCF%lradford@laurentian.ca> <545F2B64.2050409@mira.net> <CFB43725-5A86-46E2-9FE1-4D39E5B08776@uniandes.edu.co> <545F60DE.9050@[77.126.73.233]> <001201cffc1c$5199c6f0$f4cd54d0$@net.il> <545F65C8.3000409@mira.net>*Reply-to*: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>*Sender*: <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>*Thread-index*: Ac/8HVu2eprLyuGrR1OXBiC8FLqa0gAAjaKQ

There are two types of "validity" I think we can talk about here, Andy, the external - one that manifests itself in the fact that mathematics works for us in other things we do; and internal - the one that stems from strict adherence to the rules of the game (discourse). Re the latter, mathematical discourses are like the sorcerer's apprentice's broom: once put in motion, they get life of their own and nothing can stop them. Can somebody stop ME please? :-) anna -----Original Message----- From: Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2014 3:02 PM To: anna sfard Cc: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics I think your quote expresses a truth, and an important truth. It is more precise, but it is what I meant when I said earlier that the unit of analysis "rotates.", with the mediator becoming the object. The statement is still kind of agnostic on the question, isn't it though, Anna? Mathematical relations are often only an approximation to things happening in the material world, and the validity of the mathematics is not thereby any the less for that. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/ anna sfard wrote: > No, Andy, I don’t think this was, or should be, said. I apologize in > advance for quoting myself, but it would be too much to try to say > things anew in the middle of work on an all different text: > > "mathematical communication apparently reverses the developmental > order known from colloquial discourses: whereas these latter > discourses are created for the sake of communication about physical > reality, in mathematical discourse objects are created for the sake of communication. > True, also mathematical communication is supposed, eventually, to > mediate practical activities, and thus to pertain, in one way or > another to the world of primary objects that predate the discourse. > However, this fact may easily escape one’s attention. The realization > trees of mathematical signifiers [for the sake of the present > conversation, you may replace the "realization trees" with "chains of > signification"], although likely to have primary objects or processes > on such objects at their basis, may be too rich and complex to be > embraced at a glance. Leaving the concrete foundations of such trees > temporarily out of sight may thus be the condition for the proficiency of mathematical communication." > > Xmca-ing is addictive! > > anna > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2014 2:41 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics > > "Nothing outside the text" is a way of saying that "the text alone > forms the object." > Would you agree, in the context of mathematics, that the text alone > forms the object? > Andy > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/ > > > Martin John Packer wrote: > >> Who has said that there is nothing outside the text, Andy? Not >> Foucault, >> > not Anna, not Huw, not me, not Ed, and not Luis so far as I can see. > If this is the question that is at issue for you here, I think you're > the only person for whom it is an issue. > >> Martin >> >> On Nov 9, 2014, at 3:52 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Is there really *nothing* outside the text? >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > >

**Follow-Ups**:**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>

**References**:**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*anna sfard <sfard@netvision.net.il>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*anna sfard <sfard@netvision.net.il>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*anna sfard <sfard@netvision.net.il>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Julian Williams <julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Luis Radford <lradford@laurentian.ca>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*anna sfard <sfard@netvision.net.il>

**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics***From:*Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>

- Prev by Date:
**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics** - Next by Date:
**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics** - Previous by thread:
**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics** - Next by thread:
**[Xmca-l] Re: Objectivity of mathematics** - Index(es):