
Matheology § 253
Posted:
Apr 18, 2013 3:13 AM


Matheology § 253
Notice that if the result is a method that we do not quite recognize as mathematical, {{then the reason is that mathematics like many social standards have been perverted.}}. [...] What we have traced is a more or less simultaneous rise of pure mathematics and reevaluation of applied mathematics. Before all these, back in Newton?s or Euler?s day, the methods of mathematics and the methods of science were one and the same {{Mathematics was considered as a science. Frequently theologians like Nicole Oresme, John Wallis, Bonaventura Cavalieri or George Berkeley used to pursue it as an alternative to their professional occupation  today mathematics does no longer offer an alternative. Mathemativs and theology have merged.}}; if the goal is to uncover the underlying structure of the world, if mathematics is simply the language of that underlying structure, then the needs of celestial mechanics (for Newton) or rational mechanics (for Euler) are the needs of mathematics. From this perspective, the correctness of a new mathematical method ? say the infinitary methods of the calculus or the expanded notion of function ? is established by its role in application. {{That's the philosophers (touch)stone.}} [Penelope Maddy: "How applied mathematics became pure", Reviev Symbolic Logic 1 (2008) 1641]
Regards, WM

