Re: Story Fodder
- From: spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Jonathan L Cunningham)
- Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:01:45 +0000
Zeborah <zeborah@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jonathan L Cunningham <spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Zeborah <zeborah@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The modern concept that the whole world can be described in terms of
true things vs false things, and never the twain shall meet, seems to me
awfully limiting.
That's why I think logic should be taught in schools (after arithmetic
and before or in parallel with algebra).
You'd start with simple propositional logic (the logic of true and
false) but next you'd do alethic logic (the logic of
necessarily-true-for-everyone v. it-depends-on-other-things-true) and
then you'd do deontic logic: the logic of what is right (to do) v. what
is wrong (to do).
By using different symbols, every 7-year-old would firmly grasp that
there is a distinction between right v. true v. in /my/ culture etc.
Uh huh. And when would you teach them to firmly grasp that not
everything has a foundation in symbolic logic?
The same time I teach them that not everything can be expressed in
words, nor in music, nor in paintings, nor in clay pottery. Why do you
ask? Do you think that, just because I offer you a useful tool, that I
think you are obliged to use it always?
If you only know about hammers, you will (I think) use one to hammer in
screws. If you also know about screwdrivers, you at least have a choice.
Perhaps there are other ways to teach people about the difference
between obligation and opportunity, between possibility and certainty,
between opinion and fact. Perhaps it can even be done using words.
But a /lot/ of people can do calculations that would have flummoxed
engineers and architects a thousand years ago. And a lot more, who find
algebra and calculus difficult, understand enough about it to believe
that it works. This is not because modern notation makes it possible:
but because modern notation makes it easier. Maxwell's equations (which
predicted the existence of radio waves) can be expressed in four very
short lines if you know the notation. Maxwell didn't.
If you only know calculus, it takes (I think) 12 much longer lines of
calculus. If you don't know calculus ... I'm not even sure if it would
be possible to express them - except in the kinds of ambiguous phrasing
in words that translators, looking at far simpler statements made by
Euclid etc., are still arguing over what they mean.
There is a /reason/ for using symbols. And it's not to make things
harder: it's to make them easier!
I cannot emphasise this enough. The reason to learn algebra is not to
make calculations difficult. It's to let (some people) do calculations
they could not otherwise succeed in doing, and to let others do them
more easily.
Algebra, as taught in schools, is (or was) generally about calculations
involving numbers. Why should an algebra for thinking about emotions (if
one existed) be less useful? (SF world-building question.)
Since words are symbols, anyone reading this is or was capable (at some
time) of learning to use symbols. I do not make the additional claim
that anyone can learn to /use/ them effectively - any more than everyone
can learn to use words effectively. Even those that can, generally need
to practise.
Jonathan
.
- References:
- Re: Story Fodder
- From: Zeborah
- Re: Story Fodder
- From: Jonathan L Cunningham
- Re: Story Fodder
- From: Zeborah
- Re: Story Fodder
- Prev by Date: Re: Writing with other people but not *with* other people
- Next by Date: Re: Story Fodder
- Previous by thread: Re: Story Fodder
- Next by thread: Re: Story Fodder
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|