*From*: palma <palmaadriano@xxxxxxxxx>*To*: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 16:11:53 +0200

the notion of reduction at stake has nothing to do with the smokescreens produced (maybe by Nagel, though I am not of that view) consider pauling: people thought there was a chemical "bond", as per his textbook, well the bond reduces to hybrydization. those who "reduce" truth to consensus, thoughts to brains are plainly confused, imho On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Eric <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> One can think about Euler's theorem by means of ink marks (it is done > everywhere everywhen) it doesn't follow the theorem is ink marks or even is > about ink marks. > > > I think it is not the collapse of distinctions at stake here, but the > erudite Palma's refusal to consider any distinctions except the ones he is > interested in. > > Euler's Theorem is, inter alia: 1. The basic theorem as written; 2. A > relation of co-primes in arithmetic; 3. A good name for a rock band; 4. The > entire paper Euler presented describing the theorem; 5. An amateur > mathematician's understanding of the theorem, as opposed to a brilliant > mathematician's understanding of the theorem. 6. A memory of the theorem as > it appears in a dream (e.g., "The bespectacled duck kept shouting, 'Euler's > Theorem!'") 7. An anagram of Shoetree Lemur; 8. Part of a set of things > that most world leaders could not define; 9. The basis of RSA encryption; > and with a nod to base-ten, 10. Anything I want it to be, following the > Dodgson character, Mr. H. Dumpty. > > > Always-instructive Professor Palma will decide that Euler's Theorem means, > for example, something more mathematically explicit than choice 2 above, > and see all other meanings as "confused thinking." > > It's not just an instance of confusing reference and signification as in > Frege's Morning Star and Evening Star; it is a deliberate rhetorical > attempt to set the terms of debate without any attempt at definitional > consensus. > > What is Shostakovich's Tenth Symphony? Since Dmitri often composed on > paper, directly into an orchestral score, without even a piano, is the > Tenth Symphony the score, a performance of it, or the process of composing > it? Or is it what an individual auditor hears? Is it a harmonic analysis of > the Tenth? > > Consensus on definitions would help before discussing. > > Regards, > I cost rye > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html > -- palma, etheKwini, KZN palma cell phone is 0762362391 *only when in Europe*: inst. J. Nicod 29 rue d'Ulm f-75005 paris france

- » [lit-ideas] reduction redux (the notion is of the 1920's...) - palma