Re: Publication not so important in mathematics
From: Michael J Hardy (mjhardy_at_mit.edu)
Date: 03/18/05
- Next message: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Programmer Dude: "Re: A unique number for every "person" - can it be done?"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Publication not so important in mathematics"
- Next in thread: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Publication not so important in mathematics"
- Reply: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Publication not so important in mathematics"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 18 Mar 2005 00:42:34 GMT
I wrote:
> I wonder if you misunderstand the purpose of publication.
>
> The purpose is NOT to use publication as a sort of assurance
> of correctness, on the theory that published papers have been
> checked for correctness. That's not even a small part of the
> purpose.
>
> The main purpose is to acquaint readers with the material.
> A secondary purpose is that math faculty members are judged
> in part by their publication records.
jstevh@msn.com answered:
> Which basically is saying that math people believe that it's all about
> their needs and interests, and others are just outside of the process.
Huh? Maybe the part about the _secondary_ purpose says that.
But I said the MAIN purpose is to acquaint readers with the material.
You wrote something; it gets published; readers read it.
Making your work available for others to read is the purpose.
Is that wrong? -- Mike Hardy
- Next message: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Programmer Dude: "Re: A unique number for every "person" - can it be done?"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Publication not so important in mathematics"
- Next in thread: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Publication not so important in mathematics"
- Reply: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Publication not so important in mathematics"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|