Joe N. posted Jul 5, 2014 7:57 AM (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9511174): > > > (Robert Hansen, RH): For 100?s of years the music > > community has done it > >technique first, theory and expression second. > > (Joe N): There you go making it up s you go again. > Prove your point. > This ("making things up") is something that Robert Hansen does do quite, quite often.
There could be little if any evidence available that Robert Hansen's claims have any validity at all in them - be they relating to music or to math ("For 100's of years the music community has done it technique first, theory and expression second"): for every piece of evidence that he claims to provide, there is equally valid evidence against it.
But RH gives it all to us as though it's a 'done thing' like the Ten Commandments or the equivalent.
In real life; in the real world where most of us live, the learning and understanding of music or math or anything else are all hugely more complex than RH makes them out to be, and we (humans; science) know rather little about any kind of learning that we humans do.
>> (RH): A lot of people liken music to mathematics, and I >> see a lot of truth in the comparison. > Fair enough. But: >> >>(RH): However, mathematics is universal, yet when you >>compare the music of different cultures, the >>differences indicate that music acts more like language >>than it acts like mathematics. > What, if anything, does that mean?
If it does in fact mean something, where did that come from?
Most of RH's 'theories' are just fanciful imaginings unsupported by any scientific basis , like, for instance his erstwhile 'philosophy of math education':
"Children must be PUSHED (or GOADED) to learn math!" (and presumably everything else).
But it's always delivered to us with no less force than Moses had delivered those Ten Commandments to the Chosen People.