Robert Hansen (RH) posted Aug 24, 2013 7:05 PM, http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9235201 > > On Aug 24, 2013, at 12:46 AM, GS Chandy > <email@example.com> wrote: > > >>>> "The tendency of 'uneducated' people to compress > the number scale for big numbers is actually an > admirable way of measuring the world, ..." > It would have been more accurate (assuming of course that you wish to pay attention to stuff like quoting accurately, making statements and claims clearly and correctly, etc, etc) to have noted that the above was actually a quotation from Philip Ball's column in 'Nature' [http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080529/full/news.2008.866.html] - and that it was NOT something that GS Chandy had written (as you've incorrectly stated).
This is entirely clear at the post to which you have responded - see http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9233455 . > > (RH) People in general, especially uneducated people, > are incapable of "compressing" a number scale. Clever > people however are capable of devising numbers scales > involving orders of magnitude. Once devised, people > in general, even uneducated people, are able to use > these (compressed) scales. > > Inventing a scale requires thought. > > Using the scale after it was invented does not. > > That isn't to say that a thoughtful person might not > ponder the scale they are using. But, in general, > people are not thoughtful and they will just use the > scale as they would any other concrete thing or idea. > > Level 1 - Inborn sense (the animals) > Level 2 - Concrete cultural knowledge (the talking > tool makers) > Level 3 - Abstract thought (the thinkers) > > Bob Hansen > At least we are not subjected to those torturous triple-negatives in the above (as we were in your post http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9235200 dt. Aug 24, 2013 6:52 PM) - so we're able at least to try to figure out what you believe you may want to state.
I do not agree with your 'analysis' above (in several respects).
In general, your classification is - as it stands - superficial.