Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Lester Zick (lesterDELzick_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 02/02/05
- Next message: Eckard Blumschein: "Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers"
- Previous message: Arne Smeets: "Difficult combinatorics"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:12:32 GMT
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 22:38:23 -0500, "robert j. kolker"
<nowhere@nowhere.net> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>
>
>Albert wrote:
>
>> Ah! Does that include your mysterious non-numerical mathematical objects?
>
>Thingls like groups, transformations, manifolds, symmetries etc etec.
>You bet. They are purely abstract and mental.
Well some mathematicians are certainly mental.
Regards - Lester
- Next message: Eckard Blumschein: "Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers"
- Previous message: Arne Smeets: "Difficult combinatorics"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
