[Fis] pats on the back

[Karl Javorszky]

Patting on the back



It is already a first step, if someone who one has patted on the back
recognises this and give a feedback: „he has patted me on the back”.

It would be even better, if some of the intellectual content that was
transmitted, could be understood.

Let me transmit once more, this time very-very placative, what was a part
of the intended message:

There is a psychological, cultural and dogmatic tradition of distinguishing
simple *sorting and ordering* against *counting and calculating*. We have
to touch on it, as tradition builds, traditionally, a powerful resistance
against taking new ideas seriously.

1.1 The subject matter is traditionally seen as too simple, below dignity

Animals performing phototaxis, children grabbing the most fascinating toy,
statesmen opting for the least harmful alternative: they all perform
operations of *ranking, sorting* *and ordering*. Children entering school
will look down on those who can only distinguish on intensity, loudness,
color, taste etc., but lack the ability to abstract from the properties of
the things compared. Ranking, e.g. between what is desirable, usual or
inacceptable, is a faculty of the subject, who maintains his individuality
by maintaining his own set of preferences, that is, ways of sequencing
mental images. The rule* de gustibus non est disputandum* has led to
avoiding the topic of sequencing in learned discourse.

1.2 Lacking the concepts and the words to discuss the subject-matter

For reasons of simplicity and practicality, the Sumerians have come up with
a concept of a unit which has none of the properties of the object it can
stand for. The concept became formalised by Kant into the *object as such*.
Our methodology of counting is based on the understanding that objects that
are to be counted are represented by logical tokens, symbols, which are
basically of uniform make, form, appearance. This rule severely restricts
the access to ideas related to sequencing. The following Table shows the
position of the *blind spot (marked)*:

Table 1: Position of the blind spot

*Concept*

*Traditional Approach*

*New approach*

Units

all alike

all different

Example

O O O O O O

ϗ ⅌ ϼ ж ѭ ԉ

Distinguishable?

no

yes

Sorting makes sense?

no

yes

Different sequences can be seen?

no

yes

Ideas about sequences reasonable?

no, because there is nothing to talk about

yes

Ideas about different sequences reasonable?

no, because sequences are all alike

yes

Algorithm of resequencing worth thinking about?

no different sequences, so no re-sequencing thinkable

very much so

Anything to see?

no

*oh, what a spectacle!*

*Table 1*: We wish to talk about the subject of patterns observed while
reordering relatively small collections of the simplest logical objects:
numeric realisations of *a+b=c, *with *a,b **≤** 16, a **≤** b.*
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20200120/b02c8af2/attachment.html>