Math Forum Discussions

fom

Posts: 1,968
Registered: 12/4/12

Re: Infinity and Theology (26)
Posted: Nov 8, 2013 7:06 PM

Plain Text

On 11/8/2013 2:21 PM, Virgil wrote:
> In article <68ce41d6-a6d5-4b0d-a8ac-81190d2d5d1e@googlegroups.com>,
> mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de wrote:
>
>> From the catholic point of view we have to be happy that you got rid of Prof.
>> Riehl [...] and one can only wish that he will not be replaced by a
>> like-minded person. Because this sort of men is able to cause much damage, as
>> you have experienced with Riehl over many years. [...] The theologians of
>> Kiel may convince themselves what they have got and may look how they can
>> live with him. Further we cannot know whether divine Providence places just
>> such radical in Protestant universities in order to accelerate the
>> undermining and decay of Protestantism. Would we be interested to hinder
>> that? Not at all!
>> [...] The government of the grand duke of Baden should be informed in a
>> private way (by your friend, the member of parliament) of the fact that a
>> pupil and friend of Prof. Riehl (D. Foerster) has been sentenced because
>> of lèse-majesté. This should be a reason to meet the candidate recommended
>> by Prof. Riehl with greatest suspiciousness. In the senate it may be
>> preferable not to touch this point.
>> [Cantor to Prof. Dr. F.X. Heiner, Reverend Father, 31 Dec. 1895]
>>
>>
>> Regards, WM
>
> WM seems more interested in religious history that in mathematics.
> Pehaps he should better be posting to alt.theism.
>

In some ways, who could blame him?

Kronecker had "followers". Weierstrass had
"followers". Hilbert had "followers". The
list goes on to this day. I am almost certain
that Woodin has "followers". Shelah has made
a few remarks about the standpoint of the California
school.

The problem with WM is that he is not an equal
opportunity critic. With him, it is a one pony
show.