-----Original Message----- From: kirby urner [mailto:kirby.urner@gmail.com]
That's one way to characterize a difference, sure. Keep in mind I'm bucking to be this writer guy in American literature, but not so specialized that I couldn't hold my own in various math and computer science contexts.
I studied philo at Princeton and for the longest time fought with Ivory Tower philosophy types to get recognition for Fuller as a great 20th century philosopher (not mathematician, not geometer).[1]
Nor do I mean to be dissing Fuller in any general way. Don't know enough about him to do so. As a Cultural Figure, I happen to have positive associations with him. He managed to be a counter culture icon who (for me, at least) always seemed to let some inherent gentleness get the better of his of anger. Important example at the time. His fascination with regular polyhedron is not something I fully understand. But I do at least understand that he came to it after some serious study of the mainstream of geometry. Perhaps he got someplace unique. But anyone wanting to truly understand where he got should know a good deal of what he knew in getting there. Which is a good deal. So if you want, just consider what I am talking about as Fuller prerequisites. ;) Art