Gregory Arago wrote:
>
> You're right Dave. Not satisfied. Very aware of the mathematicization
> and quantophrenia in human-social thought that you're promoting. I'm
> afraid you're still trying to force a circle and a square into one.
>
So which parts of logic can be discarded by social scientists. For
example can I hold both A and not A to be true at the same time or does
A implies B mean that A is the cause of B.
I certainly agree that not all can be quantized, but where things can be
quantized statistics and probability can help reduce the noise.
When I was in 2nd year electrical engineering we had to select one
course per term outside of engineering, math, or physics. I took
introductory economics. The professor was trying to use calculus as a
tool to describe economic issues. IMO he made a fool of himself because
he knew less calculus that we did as 2nd year students. Economics often
deals with the slope of curves and the area under curves. It seems to
me that since there are appropriate mathematical tools to aid such, that
they should be used properly.
Dave
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Jun 1 04:40:44 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jun 01 2008 - 04:40:44 EDT