[MD] Language

[X Acto]

The so-called Pythagoreans, who were the first to take up mathematics, 
not only advanced this subject, but saturated with it, they fancied 
that the principles of mathematics were the principles of all things.
—Aristotle , Metaphysics 1-5 , cc. 350 BC

Pythagorean theorem
 
"The Pythagorean theorem: The sum of the areas of the two squares on 
the legs (a and b) equals the area of the square on the hypotenuse 
(c).Since the fourth century AD, Pythagoras has commonly been given 
credit for discovering the Pythagorean theorem, a theorem in geometry 
that states that in a right-angled triangle the square of the 
hypotenuse (the side opposite the right angle), c, is equal to the 
sum of the squares of the other two sides, b and a—that is, a2 + b2 = c2.
While the theorem that now bears his name was known and previously 
utilized by the Babylonians and Indians, he, or his students, are 
often said to have constructed the first proof. It must, however, 
be stressed that the way in which the Babylonians handled Pythagorean 
numbers, implies that they knew that the principle was generally 
applicable, and knew some kind of proof, which has not yet been 
found in the (still largely unpublished) cuneiform sources."

This is where Bo would say that the distinction between intelligence
and intellect is the philosophical belief that the principles of mathematics 
are the principles of all things. 


----- Original Message ----
From: X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Tue, February 9, 2010 11:32:40 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Language



On 9 Feb 2010 at 9:16, Steven Peterson wrote:

>  Hi Platt,
> 
> 
> > > If mathematics as a symbolic language doesn't provide an accurate
> > > reflection of how the world really is, why does science depend on it and
> > why
> > > do we benefit so much from it?
> >
> Hammers and screw drivers are useful tools. Note that we never ask about
> them, does this hammer correctly correspond to The-Way-Things-Really-Are? By
> the same token, it is not required that we ask such questions about the tool
> called mathematics.
> 
Hi Steve, 

The reason we don't question is because such tools are obviously 
attuned to the world as it really is. By the same token, we don't question 
whether swallowing cyanide is injurious to one's health. 

Best,
Platt

Ron:
This is a perfect illustration to my point. It was with the Pythagoreans
that the concept of "substance" emerged. I think RMP's real SOM
bogeyman is the Pythagoreans developing into Neopythagoreanism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoreanism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neopythagoreanism


The good as the one, encapsulated....fixed...it was'nt
Aristotle or Plato it seems...

"They went back to the later period of Plato's thought, 
the period when Plato endeavoured to combine his doctrine 
of Ideas with the Pythagorean number-theory, and 
identified the Good with the One, the source of the 
duality of the Infinite and the Measured with the 
resultant scale of realities from the One down to the 
objects of the material world. They emphasized the 
fundamental distinction between the Soul and the Body."
-wiki, neopythagoreanism 


      
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/