Re:Philosophy as Math-Like Thinking
by stiglitz on Saturday February 08, 2020 @08:32PM
(#22279831)
I’ve read some po-mo stuff (like Baudrillard). Terms are constantly used without clear definitions, and rather than a logical progression of thoughts it’s a snaggle of metaphors. That kind of reading is very thought-provoking, but it’s the antithesis of math.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
I feel the same way about reading math (without ever studying it).
What math are you reading? All of the math textbooks I’ve read, in university, begin each section with a precise definition and then proceed to examine the implications. Theorems begin with a precise statement of the hypotheses and conclusion before proceeding to the proof.
If you’re trying to read math on Wikipedia, without having studied it, you’re going to have a bad time. Wikipedia’s math pages are better used as a reference to remind you of what you already know and give you a jumping-off point for related topics. They are not meant to teach you math.