[Wittrs] Re: Debating with Functional Programmers
- From: "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:58:41 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "kirby_urner" <wittrsamr@...> wrote:
> In between New Math and what gets ridiculed as New New Math was the
> rise and fall of intervening schools of thought. Constructivism,
> constructionism... you know the ones. The Math Wars plays out daily,
> in mostly ritualistic fashion, the positions well known.
There's a "constructivism" in mathematics education, but I'm not sure
what that is. I don't really have a problem with Bishop's
constructivism in mathematics. It's an interesting alternative
approach to math, though perhaps I see it as something like doing math
with both hands tied behind your back. But when some constructivists
go all religious about it, and argue that everything else is wrong -
that's when I begin to see them as a bit nutty.
> Regarding your earlier post, yes, the FP vs OO (functional versus
> object oriented) battle seems to have been simmering for a long
> time, another semi-inchoate soup of visceral emotion and bitterness,
> seems to be.
It is driven by ideology, rather than by pragmatics. For that matter,
so is constructivism.
> What irks me is how little we do to converge any of these long
> simmering debates, bring them to a boil.
Competing ideologies will never agree. But when people are willing to
go pragmatic, they can compromise on useful approaches.
Regards,
Neil
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
