|
Vinnie Payne <vinnie4p...@earth_link_.net writes: However, from a brutally factual perspective, the mental life of mathematicians is no more significant than the mental life of non-mathematicians. Since one cannot be both, I fail to see how you could draw that conclusion. It's not a matter of introspection. Let's consider the attitudes involved. We have PSmith, who is wedded to the idea that mathematics is the pinnacle of human endeavor, going so far as to suggest, absurdly, that all mathematicians grapple heroically with the Riemann hypothesis and the like, sweat running down their anguished brows, madness always lurking a short lemma away from their brilliant minds. It's perfectly OK for people to regard their particular interest in this light, but it tells us nothing about the actual place of that interest in the life of humanity. We have people like Dennis Curtis, who like to emphasize that they regard some people as more important than others (in some undefined sense), mathematicians being among those more important people. This again is a perfectly natural attitude, but it really is only that, an attitude - no more and no less significant in itself than the attitude that Britney Spears is wonderful, or that Britney Spears sucks. My assertion that the mental life of mathematicians is no more significant than the mental life of non-mathematicians is just a way of setting aside as utterly insignificant such utterances. It would be nice if they could be replaced - through a truly heroic effort! - by conjectures or arguments concerning the actual role played in human life by this or that field or doctrine or activity. Mere affirmations about the significance or importance of this or that, however heartfelt, are just negligible ranting, whether or not they come from mensans.
|
Favoured: 0
