Is math a science? NOT!
pjhawke at hotmail.com
Fri Jan 16 22:26:46 EST 1998
The scientific methodology is the same for mathematics and science alike.
i.) make an observation of some phenomenon,
whether that be a apple falling, or association
of numbers in a series.
ii.) make a proposition about the observations,
Newton theory of gravity, Fermat Last Theorem.
iii.) try to disprove, extend, apply the theory,
iv.) goto i.), ii.),iii).
Mathematics and science are two forms of the same scientific inquiry.
Science is mathematics, just watered down to fit into our current
philosophical perspective of reality. Is science math's? YES.
Mathematics is pure, science is applied mathematics.
But would mathematics exist without science?
The history of math's and science are one and the same history.
The question has to asked. What value is there to be gained
from not defining mathematics as a science. It is certainly
more a science than anything else. Mathematics is
not a philosophy, theology or anything else. Mathematics
is the root of all science, if the mathematics is wrong in
a scientific theory the theory is wrong.
m.cahill.free at mailexcite.com wrote in message
<884970824.13172742 at dejanews.com>...
>It's not entirely arbitrary that I'm posting this to the AI news group, at
>least here there's a vigorous debate going on concerning the logic of this
>Mr. Lehe seems to be very busy posting this question ("Is math/maths a
>science?) in what appears to be a cross-posting frenzy. So, maybe this
>posting should be directed to him. Exactly what is meant by "math/maths" I
>haven't a clue, but it's curious to me that he's willling to make this
>distinction while seeming to question the distinction between math and
>I say 'seeming' because his question itself doesn't stand up to the
>scrutiny of logic. First let's ask ourselves the inverse of the question,
>which is 'Is there a science that is math?' Personally, I'm not aware of
>such a science, per se. Anyway, I can't think of one off the bat. Though,
>I suppose you could argue the point. However, when the question is put
>into a contra- postive form, I think the issue become a little clearer.
>Hence 'Is there no math that is not a science?' is a rediculous
>proposition. Of course there's plenty of math that has nothing at all to
>do with science, and therefore the question 'Is math a science?' is an
>invalid question, at least logically speaking.
>That makes sense to me because math and science are two different forms
>of inquiry. Each with it's own conventions, objectives, and outcomes,
>they form distinct catagorical lines of human endeavour. It's not merely
>convenient to say math and science are different, they're different for
>very good reasons. Perhaps the following will partially highlight some of
>the reasons. Science concerns itself cheifly with the study of
>phenomenon, i.e. ideas, concepts, things as they are represented to us.
>Math on the other hand is a study in noumenon, i.e. ideas, concepts,
>things which are the product of reason.
>So, it's anyone's guess as to what's meant by the original question. It
>certainly seems to suggest a lot of things to a lot of people and
>contribute to a general confusion about the subjects at hand. Maybe the
>question should be: Why does everyone want to call everything a science?
>Political Science, Social Science, Math Science, Computer Science, and ad
>nausea. . .
>-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
More information about the Neur-sci