Do you take for granted the plus sign you use in an addition problem? I think all of us probably do. Look how convenient the addition sign is; look how convenient all the symbols for mathematical operations are. Want to subtract? Use -. And so on for the operations of division and multiplication. They all seem so natural, so intrinsic, to math. Who wants, for example, to write “two hundred and another two hundred make four hundred” when 200 + 200 = 400 will do?
Math didn’t always incorporate its current operational symbols. They entered the language of math for various reasons and at different times, just as the use of Arabic numerals eventually replaced Roman numerals (except on clocks, for Super Bowls, and at Olympic games). What we take for granted is relatively new in the history of mathematical operations and would be unrecognizable to ancient Greeks, Romans, Indians, Chinese, and any other long-gone civilizations. Operational symbols and even the numbers themselves, such as 0 that was introduced in India, didn’t have an origin contemporaneous with the birth of math. The symbols for the relationships and “interactions” among mathematical entities haven’t always been universal.
Have there been similar developments in symbolic ways for the operations in human interactions? Is the evolution of math symbols an analog for the operations of human interaction and relationships? If there are analogs, are such symbols, though seemingly endemic, autochthonal, indigenous, primeval, and aboriginal, the product of cultural invention? If so, there might be little that is “natural” in society. Yet, many accept certain operations in human interactions as natural and universal. Remember, however, that for a long time no one used a plus sign, that new mathematical operations have been invented to account for new ways of seeing the world, and that without symbolic ways to handle operations, we get bogged down in verbiage.
Time for an inventory. What do you think is “natural,” “endemic,” “autochthonal,” “indigenous,” “primeval,” or “aboriginal” in human interactions and relationships? And what do you think are introduced operational symbols?
Euclidean geometry eventually evolved into an algebra-aided system that was itself aided by the Calculus. At every step in the evolution of a mathematical perspective on relationships among phenomena, new operational symbols were needed. How analogously have humans added the operational symbols to their perspectives on their own relationships and interactions?
Math didn’t always incorporate its current operational symbols. They entered the language of math for various reasons and at different times, just as the use of Arabic numerals eventually replaced Roman numerals (except on clocks, for Super Bowls, and at Olympic games). What we take for granted is relatively new in the history of mathematical operations and would be unrecognizable to ancient Greeks, Romans, Indians, Chinese, and any other long-gone civilizations. Operational symbols and even the numbers themselves, such as 0 that was introduced in India, didn’t have an origin contemporaneous with the birth of math. The symbols for the relationships and “interactions” among mathematical entities haven’t always been universal.
Have there been similar developments in symbolic ways for the operations in human interactions? Is the evolution of math symbols an analog for the operations of human interaction and relationships? If there are analogs, are such symbols, though seemingly endemic, autochthonal, indigenous, primeval, and aboriginal, the product of cultural invention? If so, there might be little that is “natural” in society. Yet, many accept certain operations in human interactions as natural and universal. Remember, however, that for a long time no one used a plus sign, that new mathematical operations have been invented to account for new ways of seeing the world, and that without symbolic ways to handle operations, we get bogged down in verbiage.
Time for an inventory. What do you think is “natural,” “endemic,” “autochthonal,” “indigenous,” “primeval,” or “aboriginal” in human interactions and relationships? And what do you think are introduced operational symbols?
Euclidean geometry eventually evolved into an algebra-aided system that was itself aided by the Calculus. At every step in the evolution of a mathematical perspective on relationships among phenomena, new operational symbols were needed. How analogously have humans added the operational symbols to their perspectives on their own relationships and interactions?
RSS Feed