Re: First class developer: who ?
BGB / cr88192 wrote:
I guess one can clarify what they mean by "math".
Certainly not what you describe so rhetorically and prejudicially in your post.
there is a lot that is arguably math which I have noted is rather useful
(say: vectors, quaternions, matrices, ...).
similarly, nearly all manners of "calculating stuff" and "doing stuff" can
be useful with computers...
what is not so useful though is the sort of ultra-abstracting anti-reality
aspects of math, where one forsakes the thing being described for a big mass
of set notation or abstract logic.
Strip away the pejorative descriptive terms, provide evidence that anything at
all is "forsaken", and talk about things as they really are.
You make a claim that something is "not useful" by mis-characterizing it, and
using unupported claims that something is "forsaken", and depend on the
emotional connotations of "ultra-" and "anti-" and "big mass" to make your
point, thus hiding that your point is not, in fact, valid.
The reality is that there is math, and there is mathematical. Some in this
thread have tried to impose an artificial distinction between "math" and
"science". I argue that there is not so much separation; one can see
mathematics as the science of certain kinds of relationships, perhaps even
harder than "science" since in math one can actually prove things. Likewise,
science is an expansion of mathematics into the "real" world. It is
troublesome at best to draw conclusions about reality by the application of
artificial linguistic conventions.
I would agree that computer programming is not math as such, nor is it
science. It is, however, quite mathematical and scientific as a discipline,
and uses the noetic principles and practices thereof to accomplish its goals.
As to the utility of math, arguing that, say, set theory or predicate calculus
are not useful is just the sort of anti-intellectualism and prejudice that
makes education such a joke, deprives research of funding, and generally
increases the stupidity of the population. Without those two things in
particular, we would not have developed the amazingly powerful database
systems in use today, to pick one example. Those disciplines are very useful,
as anyone not too weak-egoed about their own intellectual capacity would
recognize. It's a matter of understanding that theoretical research is an end
unto itself, and that concomitant "real-world" applications emerge after that
research has borne fruit.
IMO, this side of math is not particularly useful to the greater goods:
"make it work" and "get it done".
You're absolutely right, that is opinion.
I would almost rather be stupid than live in that sort of "reality"...
Tempting, so tempting ...
--
Lew