Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Matheology § 095
Replies: 25   Last Post: Aug 1, 2012 6:25 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Graham Cooper

Posts: 4,344
Registered: 5/20/10
Re: Matheology § 095
Posted: Aug 1, 2012 6:25 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Jul 31, 1:33 am, FredJeffries <fredjeffr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 12:39 pm, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>

> > Are you saying that mathematicians nowadays will turn the blind eye
> > for anyone who have ideas like Dooyeweerdian? Why is that? I don't
> > think this is the case, i.e. I don't think they object to merely
> > having those ideas, I don't know however, but I think what
> > mathematicians want is non trivial new results, if Dooyeweerdian's
> > intuitions can be stated clearly on informal level as to admit
> > faithful formalization of them with a consistent formal system and if
> > that formal system showed success in interpreting ordinary mathematics
> > as well as opening the doors for further mathematical investigation,

>
> Ah, that's where it all breaks down. As much sympathy as I have for
> a Dooyeweerd/Strauss non-reductionistic system or any other non-
> standard
> foundation (or non-foundation), I have yet to come across any that
> actually solve a mathematical problem.
>
> Few mathematicians care about foundational matters. They just want
> to do their jobs. Unless you show them something with impact, like



Innovation peters out, a new smart phone button every few years is all
that's left.

All that remains now is a colossal set of hard problems... most of
which will fall under the one hammer, automated semantics.

1971
Person: HAD YOU TOUCHED ANY PYRAMID BEFORE YOU PUT THE GREEN ONE ON
THE LITTLE CUBE?
Computer: YES, THE GREEN ONE.

Person: WHEN DID YOU PICK IT UP?
Computer: WHILE I WAS STACKING UP THE RED CUBE, A LARGE RED BLOCK AND
A LARGE GREEN CUBE.

Person: WHY?
Computer: TO GET RID OF IT.

Person: WHY DID YOU DO THAT?
Computer: TO CLEAN OFF THE RED CUBE.

Person: WHY DID YOU CLEAR OFF THAT CUBE?
Computer: TO PUT IT ON A LARGE GREEN CUBE.

Person: WHY DID YOU DO THAT?
Computer: TO STACK UP THE RED CUBE , A LARGE RED BLOCK AND A LARGE
GREEN CUBE.

Person: WHY DID YOU DO THAT?
Computer: BECAUSE YOU ASKED ME TO.

Person: HOW DID YOU DO IT?
Computer: BY PUTTING A LARGE...

Person: HAVE YOU PICKED SUPERBLOCK UP SINCE WE BEGAN?
Computer: YES.

Person: WHY DID YOU DROP IT?
Computer: BY "IT", I ASSUME YOU MEAN THE SUPERBLOCK.
I CAN'T EXPLAIN A NON-EXISTENT EVENT.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHRDLU
One was that SHRDLU's world was so simple that the entire set of
objects and locations could be described by including as few as
perhaps 50 words: nouns like "block" and "cone", verbs like "place on"
and "move to", and adjectives like "big" and "blue". The possible
combinations of these basic language building blocks were quite
simple, and the program was fairly adept at figuring out what the user
meant.

Herc
--
www.microPROLOG.com



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.