On 10/22/06, Doyle Saylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Greetings Economists,
On Oct 22, 2006, at 7:04 PM, Sandwichman wrote:
> Yes, but the pure math is ultimately based on an analogy to the
> practical stuff. If it was not, why would we call them both "math">
Doyle;
But you ask what I think is a profound question. Why do we call them
both math? Underlying this question is how mathematicians look at a
variety of math as 'language' like. In other words our basic way of
saying what one is and what another cognitive work may be, is basically
'confused' in Wittgenstein's sense of the word confusion.
A shorter way of saying that is that the word "math" is a metaphor
when referring to pure math.
--
Sandwichman
