Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: robert j. kolker (nowhere_at_nowhere.net)
Date: 02/02/05
- Next message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Neil W Rickert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Jason: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Jason: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 22:37:11 -0500
>
> Philosophy does that much, Bob. What is different about mathematics?
Mathematics is rigourous. Philosophy is sloppy.
Bob Kolker
>
- Next message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Neil W Rickert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Jason: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Jason: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
