IS there a job that doesnt involve math, at all?

Vraiment? Je trouve que quand je parle en une autre lange je n'utilise pas de mathematics de tout. Sauf que les langes d'ordinateur mais ca n'est pas le meme chose.

Traduit/Translated: Really? I find that when I speak in another language I don't use any maths at all. Except for programming languages but that's not the same thing.

I observed no use of maths during that process... If you hooked my brain up to an EEG you'd note that the "math areas" remain the faint glow of background operation whereas "linguistic areas" would have illuminated themselves quite brightly.

Language is language, math is math and rarely the twain shall cross-multiply.

How many of today's writers worry about iambic penameters when writing their novel? Using instinctive math, I'd venture a guess of near 0% ...

But if you wanna be on the safe side, make it writers of romantic novels (you know, the emo-porn dime novels for housewives ...)

None that I know... though most of them keep a constant eye on the word count to see how much work they've done

Etruscia- I really think that the point that this teacher was attempting to make, is that math is an important part of life, and that you need it simply to conduct the daily business of living. I think that he used a rather unsophisticated approach though, and as people have said, did not define the parameters of what he considers, "math".

It is also a way for the teacher to impress upon his students how important HIS job is to society!

possible, but unlikley as this was a college course, everyone knows how important math can be. Anyhow im intrested to know what the professor was thinking of.

Language is all full of logic, symbols, formulae, and so forth. I've never actually read anything on the subject, but I'm pretty sure that language, math, and music are probably connected somehow in cognition - and not just because people who are good at one tend to be good at the others. They all have syntax, and rhythm, and an innate organizational structure and conveyance of meaning that seems very similar, at least to me. Take a peice of music, and imagine that it is the tones used by someone speaking - with most (non-lyrical) music you can construct a theme or a conversation out of just the notes, if you get yourself to think about it that way. Music itself is mathematical - it's all counting, and rhythm and timing. If you think about it, speech is too. There are infinitely many ways to say a sentence, each with its own connotation, just as there are infinitely many ways to play a given sequence of notes. Symbolic logic and computer languages are, I think the missing link between language and math. It's mathematical at heart, but it's got structures and rules that are very linguistic in nature.

Re: IS there a job that doesnt involve math, at all?


If comediens are ruled out due to timing, and mimes because they can conceptualize a box, then I think your quest is hopeless because the human thought process makes us aware of time, and of shapes, both of which seem to be invalid by your teacher's definition.

Being a politician is the only job I can think of where avoiding reality and convincing others of your fantasies leads to success. But that says more about the voters than the Pols.

You're not an artist are you?

Gods no, and I'm not implying that all art is mathematical either. But I did just spend a month living with two talented musicians who agree with me on this, so it's not completely unfounded. I did use to play the violin, but unfortunately I sucked, and disliked Classical music (I wanted to play celtic with it), and it seemed very mathematical to me as well. And linguistic. If you want to be good, you have to learn to count time pretty damn well. When I was figuring out how to make the stress patterns for my conlang, I made them to mimic peices of music that I liked.

Actually on Rufios point, music is math. Music that we like, are for the most part just mathematical patterns that our brains enjoy. Its not saying that artists/musicians are mathematicians, its just saying they know what patterns they like, and which they dont.

SCREAMS

That's it. This thread is getting discontinued from the notification option.

I refuse to discuss anything in which the goalposts have been so far shifted as to render meaningful conversation useless. That guy who started this thread, please punch your maths teacher for me and then hand him a book on basic logic with the "shifting the goal-posts" falacy circled.

As for anyone else if you define mathematics as anything to do with paterns, numbers, geometry, time, space, human thought processes then guess what? Everything is maths! A term which applies to everything is rather useless as is a discussion based upon arguing whether certain things are or are not in a category made so broad as to include everything. Such a discussion is pointless, irelevant and something in which I want no part nor will continue to access.

Look me up when you get to the discussion on whether history is astronomy because people used lunar calendars.

The most important philosophers of language in the 20th century were all mathematicians ... Frege, Wittgenstein, Russell, Kripke. Trying to convert it into symbolic logic has proved to be a bit of a bitch, however. Music is absolutely mathematical ... just look at Bach.

theantibuddha is right ... your professor must define math rigorously for you to be able to seriously give a go at the answer.

I'm not meaning to apply math to everything, antibuddah, and I agree it's a little silly to. On the other hand - what do you think constitutes "math"? Just what you're taught in class?

Baying - they were all mathematicians?..... yeah, I guess they were. Should pay more attention in class....

Wait, did you say Wittgenstein? Would this be a Wittgenstein who wrote an "essay" criticising Frasier's Golden Bough, in which few of his "paragraphs" contain no more than two "sentences," most of which begin with "But"???? After reading that, I am most decidedly uninterested in hearing what he has to say about language.

rufio ... I think you ought to reconsider ... Wittgenstein's "Philosophical Investigations" is pretty friggin' brilliant. Kripke is basically reinterpreting Wittgenstein for us.