[Edu-sig] Brainstorming about GNU Math
kirby.urner at gmail.com
Thu Mar 23 00:35:45 CET 2006
> Except that's another big difference in our sensiblities - as a good progressive, you are a
> relativist. There ain't no such thing as speaking good ;)
I have a long thread with some guy on wittgenstein-dialognet (a Yahoo!
group) about moral relativism, whether Wittgenstein was one, etc. He
wasn't, nor am I, seems to be the upshot of that thread.
> Synergetic geometry, as I hear it presented, is about space - but somehow exists
> outside of time. It popped into being - an otherwordly vision.
No, Fuller casts his body of work as very time/size specific, his
self-discipline, with a vocabulary that's deliberately remote and
deliberately engineered. He even admits has central insights might
all pre-exist in other literature.
That being said, he's a born explorer and has the right to draw his
map, which is what he did. I find it a very useful contribution, as
I've said. He does more to interconnect the disciplines than most,
and isn't writing as a geometer, specifically.
I file it under Philosophy and/or Literature. It's a work in the
humanities, maybe a liberal art in its own right (given how no
department wants to claim it).
> Maybe true. But in my view of what makes the study of math
> meaningful, its math without much meaning, to the extent we are really talking math
> at all, rather than something not more like - American Unaccountable Geniuses 101.
> Kay does make a good 102.
> It's a curriculum, yes.
I'll file that under "from a guy who likes to have opinions" --
whether well-informed or no.
If you ever undertake a serious study of Fuller's synergetics, maybe
let me know. I could maybe offer a few pointers.
More information about the Edu-sig