[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The Accessibility of Type Theory Research

To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: The Accessibility of Type Theory Research
From: Steve Dekorte <address@hidden>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:21:24 -0800
In-reply-to: <r02000200-1028-12D8A5021B6711D8BFA1003065B28AFA@[168.100.204.225]>
References: <r02000200-1028-12D8A5021B6711D8BFA1003065B28AFA@[168.100.204.225]>
Sender: address@hidden

On Nov 20, 2003, at 6:37 AM, Peter J. Wasilko wrote:
>> Most of OO people don't even heard about the sigma calculus but think
>> they "grok" objects.
>
> My only quible with this logic is that it confuses mastery of a thing,
> with mastery of the mathematics and notation used by academics to
> discuss the thing.
>
> This raises the old Art - Craft - Science debate (see Knuth).

By the same logic it seems would could conclude Shakespeare didn't 
"grok" english and Beethoven didn't "grok" music as they where ignorant 
(respectively) of modern linguistic and musical theory.

-- Steve

Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Accessibility of Type Theory Research
  - From: Daniel Yokomiso <daniel_yokomiso@yahoo.com.br>

References:
- Re: The Accessibility of Type Theory Research
  - From: "Peter J. Wasilko" <futurist@cloud9.net>

Prev by Date: RE: Of Legal Language and CS Notation
Next by Date: Re: dynamic vs. static typing
Previous by thread: Re: The Accessibility of Type Theory Research
Next by thread: Re: The Accessibility of Type Theory Research
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread