The author has attempted to construct a rational argument against rationalism. This strikes me as one of those inherently self-defeating exercises, like looking for an online support group for your internet addiction. It might be some kind of postmodern joke, except it seems so pathetically earnest.
And while you're there, scroll down; his erotic poetry is truly awful!
2007-01-08 06:27:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by injanier 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Haven't read the books, but agree that maths and science can be self-contradictory and paradoxical. Maths and science seek truth, but are human-constructed models of nature. The models are far from perfect, but for describing a lot of phenomena, they work well enough for us to rely on, and we know the limits of their applicability. A model doesn't have to work in all circumstances to be meaningful - we just have to know what those circumstances are. Hence we often maintain more than one model for describing the same phenomenon (e.g. Newton's equations of motion vs relativity - even though we've known for 100 years that Newton's equations are "wrong" and have had a more accurate model available, we continue to use them within their scope because they are so much simpler and in practical terms give us the same answer).
2007-01-09 00:15:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by moblet 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have never heard of these books. All I have to say about their argument is that if mathematics and science are meaningless, they have certainly produced some meaningless useful results for mankind. Without them we would all still be living in near-stone age conditions.
2007-01-08 02:08:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by MathBioMajor 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
As much as I dislike most of my mathematics and science classes, they have contributated greatly to our society. Yes, they are indeed self-contradictory in some cases but these cases are insignificant compared to all the proven theories. If you look at the world today, it is impossible to claim all mathematics and science are meaningless.
2007-01-08 11:48:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by shutup_ho 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
The sections on math are ridiculous. Have math definitions changed over time? Yes. Does there exist a class of problems for which there is no solution? Yes. Is that a contradiction? No.
HTH
Charles
2007-01-08 02:12:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by Charles 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
You've fallen for classic double talk and reverse psychology, supplemented with ample bullshit.
The paradox is only in the mind; the old tree falling in the forest routine. Its done to confuse and complicate otherwise straight forward equations.
Its no more relevant to science than what you flush down your toilet.
2007-01-08 02:11:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
There a test for pre-Darwin awards......
2007-01-08 02:00:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Math is of the DEVIL! MUAHAHAHAHAHA
2007-01-08 01:59:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋