<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Question of Philisophy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://habitablezone.com/2020/06/23/a-question-of-philisophy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://habitablezone.com/2020/06/23/a-question-of-philisophy/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 00:20:24 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: DanS</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2020/06/23/a-question-of-philisophy/#comment-45117</link>
		<dc:creator>DanS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2020 17:25:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://habitablezone.com/?p=82728#comment-45117</guid>
		<description>The way I see it, and as shown in your post regarding the Amazonian Pirahã tribe, reason obviously came before counting.

The people created a language with a need for reason (communication), but with no real need (reason) to count. Apparently a person either had and did whatever, or had not and did nothing.

No real need to count people, since everyone was likely known. You either went hunting with Roger, Joe and Sam, or not.

No real need to count mangos, since you either brought home enough food, or too much food, or not enough food.

Recipes? You either cook it, or don&#039;t, or burn it, or cook it a bit longer.

The limited numbering system mentioned in the article might even have been used in a local gaming system for the high-brows of the society, like a local chess club, or even a touch of wizardry. No need to let everyone know exactly how to figure out how many more fish you need to catch for the big party. Becoming the go-to guy for the tough answers is sorta mystical.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The way I see it, and as shown in your post regarding the Amazonian Pirahã tribe, reason obviously came before counting.</p>
<p>The people created a language with a need for reason (communication), but with no real need (reason) to count. Apparently a person either had and did whatever, or had not and did nothing.</p>
<p>No real need to count people, since everyone was likely known. You either went hunting with Roger, Joe and Sam, or not.</p>
<p>No real need to count mangos, since you either brought home enough food, or too much food, or not enough food.</p>
<p>Recipes? You either cook it, or don&#8217;t, or burn it, or cook it a bit longer.</p>
<p>The limited numbering system mentioned in the article might even have been used in a local gaming system for the high-brows of the society, like a local chess club, or even a touch of wizardry. No need to let everyone know exactly how to figure out how many more fish you need to catch for the big party. Becoming the go-to guy for the tough answers is sorta mystical.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vitruvius</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2020/06/23/a-question-of-philisophy/#comment-45046</link>
		<dc:creator>Vitruvius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2020 22:07:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://habitablezone.com/?p=82728#comment-45046</guid>
		<description>Well, not just now - Turns out, it&#039;s been floating in a buried folder on my computer for the last decade.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2014-12.dir/pdf2Yb7JAO0ZG.pdf&quot; title=&quot;Number As A Cognitive Technology: Evidence From Piraha Language and Cognition - Michael C. Frank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Number As A Cognitive Technology: Evidence From Piraha Language and Cognition - Michael C. Frank, et. al.&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, not just now &#8211; Turns out, it&#8217;s been floating in a buried folder on my computer for the last decade.</p>
<p><a href="http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2014-12.dir/pdf2Yb7JAO0ZG.pdf" title="Number As A Cognitive Technology: Evidence From Piraha Language and Cognition - Michael C. Frank" rel="nofollow">Number As A Cognitive Technology: Evidence From Piraha Language and Cognition &#8211; Michael C. Frank, et. al.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hank</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2020/06/23/a-question-of-philisophy/#comment-44990</link>
		<dc:creator>hank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Jun 2020 20:26:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://habitablezone.com/?p=82728#comment-44990</guid>
		<description>all those great minds keeping minutely detailed records of planetary movements and not one bothered to keep a notebook to keep track of predictions to see if any came true.

I guess all those great minds are now finding employment as psychologists and economists.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>all those great minds keeping minutely detailed records of planetary movements and not one bothered to keep a notebook to keep track of predictions to see if any came true.</p>
<p>I guess all those great minds are now finding employment as psychologists and economists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: podrock</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2020/06/23/a-question-of-philisophy/#comment-44988</link>
		<dc:creator>podrock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Jun 2020 18:29:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://habitablezone.com/?p=82728#comment-44988</guid>
		<description>“Astrology was the ancient world’s most ambitious applied mathematics problem, a grand data-analysis enterprise sustained for centuries by some of history’s most brilliant minds, from Ptolemy to al-Kindi to Kepler.”

&lt;a href=&quot;https://boingboing.net/2020/06/26/a-scheme-of-heaven-is-a-deep-i.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://boingboing.net/2020/06/26/a-scheme-of-heaven-is-a-deep-i.html&lt;/a&gt;



</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“Astrology was the ancient world’s most ambitious applied mathematics problem, a grand data-analysis enterprise sustained for centuries by some of history’s most brilliant minds, from Ptolemy to al-Kindi to Kepler.”</p>
<p><a href="https://boingboing.net/2020/06/26/a-scheme-of-heaven-is-a-deep-i.html" rel="nofollow">https://boingboing.net/2020/06/26/a-scheme-of-heaven-is-a-deep-i.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hank</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2020/06/23/a-question-of-philisophy/#comment-44974</link>
		<dc:creator>hank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2020 12:18:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://habitablezone.com/?p=82728#comment-44974</guid>
		<description>But if you want a serious answer, I&#039;ll say humans are wired for both thinking and counting at the factory.  Logic and arithmetic are attempts to systematize these into formal systems that can be expressed symbolically and manipulated according to fixed rules that are always right and never change.  But common sense tells us nothing is always right, and everything changes.  

But eventually we learned that we can&#039;t be trusted to rely on &quot;common sense&quot; because it doesn&#039;t always work.  In fact, it rarely works as well as we expect it to.

There&#039;s a story that the Hottentot language doesn&#039;t have a word for any number greater than 3.  They count &quot;1, 2, 3, many&quot;.  To be fair, in their world, this was all they really needed.  

But there comes a point when you really need to believe that 5+7 has to be the same as 7+5 and that 7x5 has to be the same as 5x7, but that 2x(3+4) is different than (2x3)+4.  And to convince yourself of that, you need logic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But if you want a serious answer, I&#8217;ll say humans are wired for both thinking and counting at the factory.  Logic and arithmetic are attempts to systematize these into formal systems that can be expressed symbolically and manipulated according to fixed rules that are always right and never change.  But common sense tells us nothing is always right, and everything changes.  </p>
<p>But eventually we learned that we can&#8217;t be trusted to rely on &#8220;common sense&#8221; because it doesn&#8217;t always work.  In fact, it rarely works as well as we expect it to.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a story that the Hottentot language doesn&#8217;t have a word for any number greater than 3.  They count &#8220;1, 2, 3, many&#8221;.  To be fair, in their world, this was all they really needed.  </p>
<p>But there comes a point when you really need to believe that 5+7 has to be the same as 7+5 and that 7&#215;5 has to be the same as 5&#215;7, but that 2x(3+4) is different than (2&#215;3)+4.  And to convince yourself of that, you need logic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vitruvius</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2020/06/23/a-question-of-philisophy/#comment-44971</link>
		<dc:creator>Vitruvius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2020 09:28:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://habitablezone.com/?p=82728#comment-44971</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t see how everyone having a made mind would affect the question negativetly.

Also, I never phrased the question as whether counting came before or after arithmetic.  The question was &lt;em&gt;reasoning&lt;/em&gt; or counting, alternatively phrased as &lt;em&gt;logic&lt;/em&gt; or arithmetic.


Dunno what others here think, or what your answer specifically was, but I&#039;mma gonna place you in the &quot;counting&quot; camp.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t see how everyone having a made mind would affect the question negativetly.</p>
<p>Also, I never phrased the question as whether counting came before or after arithmetic.  The question was <em>reasoning</em> or counting, alternatively phrased as <em>logic</em> or arithmetic.</p>
<p>Dunno what others here think, or what your answer specifically was, but I&#8217;mma gonna place you in the &#8220;counting&#8221; camp.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hank</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2020/06/23/a-question-of-philisophy/#comment-44951</link>
		<dc:creator>hank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2020 13:11:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://habitablezone.com/?p=82728#comment-44951</guid>
		<description>Everyone here has already made up his mind.

Seriously, Counting came before Arithmetic.  Arithmetic is a set of formal rules and procedures that systematize and extend Counting.  For example, even the most primitive tribal culture needs to count things, even add and subtract.  More advanced Arithmetic, like multiplication, division and fractions, comes later.  5+7 = 7+5 = 12.
From there on you progress to:

Algebra: the application of arithmetic to abstract, general numbers (as opposed to actual numbers). a+b = b+a = c.  In Algebra you don&#039;t deal with numbers, you deal with symbols which can be ANY number.

Real Analysis: (Which includes calculus and differential equations) which studies the behavior and changes of algebraic statements.

Complex analysis: Which introduces the tool of imaginary numbers to help make sense of real analysis.

And of course, there are things like Geometry, the study of space itself and of relationships within it, which doesn&#039;t seem to easily fit in with the earlier progression. Logic plays a big role in Geometry, so my guess is it came first, but I don&#039;t really know for sure.

Its only fair to warn you, I didn&#039;t learn or read this anywhere, its only my opinion.  I have a book called &quot;An Introduction to the History of Mathematics&quot; on my bookshelf, but I must confess I&#039;ve never read it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Everyone here has already made up his mind.</p>
<p>Seriously, Counting came before Arithmetic.  Arithmetic is a set of formal rules and procedures that systematize and extend Counting.  For example, even the most primitive tribal culture needs to count things, even add and subtract.  More advanced Arithmetic, like multiplication, division and fractions, comes later.  5+7 = 7+5 = 12.<br />
From there on you progress to:</p>
<p>Algebra: the application of arithmetic to abstract, general numbers (as opposed to actual numbers). a+b = b+a = c.  In Algebra you don&#8217;t deal with numbers, you deal with symbols which can be ANY number.</p>
<p>Real Analysis: (Which includes calculus and differential equations) which studies the behavior and changes of algebraic statements.</p>
<p>Complex analysis: Which introduces the tool of imaginary numbers to help make sense of real analysis.</p>
<p>And of course, there are things like Geometry, the study of space itself and of relationships within it, which doesn&#8217;t seem to easily fit in with the earlier progression. Logic plays a big role in Geometry, so my guess is it came first, but I don&#8217;t really know for sure.</p>
<p>Its only fair to warn you, I didn&#8217;t learn or read this anywhere, its only my opinion.  I have a book called &#8220;An Introduction to the History of Mathematics&#8221; on my bookshelf, but I must confess I&#8217;ve never read it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
