Re: Pure-cardinal approach *is* possible! (was: Mathematical concepts)
- From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 09:18:26 -0300
In <REM-2005sep01-003@xxxxxxxxx>, on 09/01/2005
at 08:30 PM, rem642b@xxxxxxxxx (Robert Maas, see
http://tinyurl.com/uh3t) said:
>That's fine with me. Your alternative seems to be to push an entire
>graduate-level foundations course at a 3-yr-old the very first day
>they ever hear of the concept of cardinal numbers,
ROTF,LMAO! You can't rebut his position, so you instead lie about it.
Third grade is too early??? You gotta be kidding!
I doubt it. He doesn't have to run faster than the bear.
>Why do you propose teaching something the child will need to
>un-learn later??
Why do you beat your wife? He proposed no such thing.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- References:
- Re: Pure-cardinal approach *is* possible! (was: Mathematical concepts)
- From: Robert Maas, see http://tinyurl.com/uh3t
- Re: Pure-cardinal approach *is* possible! (was: Mathematical concepts)
- Prev by Date: Re: Han's startling new set theory.
- Next by Date: Re: question about wreath product
- Previous by thread: Re: Pure-cardinal approach *is* possible! (was: Mathematical concepts)
- Next by thread: Re: Please help me solve this DE
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|