Very Formal Affairs

S. Dasgupta
{"title":"Very Formal Affairs","authors":"S. Dasgupta","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190843861.003.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"If social and behavioral scientists have harbored “physics envy” as some have wryly claimed—envy of its explanatory and predictive success— then computer scientists may be said to have suffered from “mathematics envy.” Interestingly, this envy was less a characteristic of the pioneers of digital computing of the 1940s and 1950s, the people who shed first light on the design of digital electronic computers, the first programming languages, the first operating systems, the first language translators, and so on—though most of them were trained as mathematicians. They were too busy learning the heuristic principles of computational artifacts. Rather, it was in the 1960s when we first find signs of a kind of mathematics envy, at least in some segments of the embryonic computer science community. It was as if, having discovered (or invented) the heuristic principles of practical computational artifacts, some felt the need to understand the underlying “science” of these artifacts—by which they meant its underlying mathematics and logic. Mathematics envy could be assuaged only by thinking mathematically about computational artifacts. Computer science would then be raised to the intellectual stature of, say, physics or indeed of mathematics itself if computer scientists could transform their discipline into a mathematical science. One cannot blame computer scientists who thought this way. The fact is, there is something about mathematics that situates it in a world of its own. “Mathematics is a unique aspect of human thought,” wrote hyperprolific science (fact and fiction) writer Isaac Asimov. And Asimov was by no means the first or only person to think so. But wherein lies the uniqueness of mathematical thinking? Perhaps the answer is that for many people, mathematics offers the following promises:The unearthliness of mathematical objects. The perfectness and exactness of mathematical concepts. An inexorable rigor of mathematical reasoning. The certainty of mathematical knowledge. The self-sufficiency of the mathematical universe. These promises are clearly enviable if they can be kept; usually, they are kept.","PeriodicalId":133335,"journal":{"name":"The Second Age of Computer Science","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Second Age of Computer Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190843861.003.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

If social and behavioral scientists have harbored “physics envy” as some have wryly claimed—envy of its explanatory and predictive success— then computer scientists may be said to have suffered from “mathematics envy.” Interestingly, this envy was less a characteristic of the pioneers of digital computing of the 1940s and 1950s, the people who shed first light on the design of digital electronic computers, the first programming languages, the first operating systems, the first language translators, and so on—though most of them were trained as mathematicians. They were too busy learning the heuristic principles of computational artifacts. Rather, it was in the 1960s when we first find signs of a kind of mathematics envy, at least in some segments of the embryonic computer science community. It was as if, having discovered (or invented) the heuristic principles of practical computational artifacts, some felt the need to understand the underlying “science” of these artifacts—by which they meant its underlying mathematics and logic. Mathematics envy could be assuaged only by thinking mathematically about computational artifacts. Computer science would then be raised to the intellectual stature of, say, physics or indeed of mathematics itself if computer scientists could transform their discipline into a mathematical science. One cannot blame computer scientists who thought this way. The fact is, there is something about mathematics that situates it in a world of its own. “Mathematics is a unique aspect of human thought,” wrote hyperprolific science (fact and fiction) writer Isaac Asimov. And Asimov was by no means the first or only person to think so. But wherein lies the uniqueness of mathematical thinking? Perhaps the answer is that for many people, mathematics offers the following promises:The unearthliness of mathematical objects. The perfectness and exactness of mathematical concepts. An inexorable rigor of mathematical reasoning. The certainty of mathematical knowledge. The self-sufficiency of the mathematical universe. These promises are clearly enviable if they can be kept; usually, they are kept.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非常正式的事务
如果社会和行为科学家怀有“物理嫉妒”,就像一些人讽刺地声称的那样——嫉妒其解释和预测的成功——那么计算机科学家可能会说遭受“数学嫉妒”。有趣的是,这种嫉妒并不是20世纪40年代和50年代数字计算先驱的特征,这些人首先揭示了数字电子计算机的设计,第一个编程语言,第一个操作系统,第一个语言翻译等等,尽管他们中的大多数都是受过数学家训练的。他们忙于学习计算人工制品的启发式原理。相反,直到20世纪60年代,我们才第一次发现了一种数学嫉妒的迹象,至少在计算机科学界的一些萌芽阶段是这样的。就好像,在发现(或发明)实用计算工件的启发式原理之后,一些人觉得有必要了解这些工件的潜在“科学”——他们指的是其潜在的数学和逻辑。只有从数学的角度思考计算人工制品,才能缓解对数学的嫉妒。如果计算机科学家能够将计算机科学转变为一门数学科学,那么计算机科学将被提升到物理学或数学本身的智力地位。人们不能责怪这样想的计算机科学家。事实是,数学有一些东西把它置于一个自己的世界里。“数学是人类思维的一个独特方面,”多产的科学(事实和小说)作家艾萨克·阿西莫夫写道。阿西莫夫绝不是第一个或唯一一个这样想的人。但是数学思维的独特性在哪里呢?也许答案是,对许多人来说,数学提供了以下承诺:数学对象的超凡脱俗。数学概念的完美性和精确性。数学推理的不可阻挡的严谨性。数学知识的确定性。数学宇宙的自给自足。这些承诺如果能够兑现,显然是令人羡慕的;通常,它们是保存的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Abstractions All The Way A Symbolic Science Of Intelligence Algol Genes Getting To Know Parallelism Very Formal Affairs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1