Pynchon & Math (Aristotle vs. Plato)

[Paul Mackin]

On 1/25/2013 5:49 PM, Markekohut wrote:
>   We reduce the range of expression in AtD if we read Yahmeen's poignant, earnest seeking as
> Another joke.

Correct, I'm afraid.

Alice, you're naughty.

p
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 25, 2013, at 5:45 PM, alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Pynchon can't resist a joke, an inside joke, like all inside all the
>> theads of the seats we are  sitting on that is suddenly yanked out
>> from under our comfee postures, if we still have them, type-joak, so
>> he tickles us with the ancient battle that boyz and girlz who play at
>> this game are game to. But to what end? Shit if I know. I'm not gunna
>> go read  The Republic_ one more time becuae I've reading this Pynchon,
>> Cohen, and the Crisis of Victorian Mathematics
>>
>> Thomas Dechand
>>
>> And, I mybe neer get the joak, exactly, but I got it the first time
>> close enough.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Markekohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> This is Yashmeen, right? who gives up math? #notanaccident
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On Jan 25, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1/25/2013 2:07 AM, Prashant Kumar wrote:
>>>
>>> The interesting thing about this dichotomy (in the proper approach to
>>> Ethics) you mention is that it presupposes a  Platonic conception of
>>> mathematics; mathematics as a menagerie of axiomatically true pieces of
>>> abstraction.
>>>
>>> A fallibilistic conception of mathematics (the mathematical empiricism of
>>> Quine and Putnam), itself descended from the american pragmatists, which
>>> conceives of mathematical theorems as contingent truths, will result in a
>>> more nebulous notion of precision.
>>>
>>> I would argue this sort of naturalism, nature as a series of convenient but
>>> contingent truths, is a staple of american fiction more generally. For
>>> example, look at how Pynchon handles the feud between the Quaternionists and
>>> the Vectorists in AtD.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Mathematics once seemed the way--the internal life of numbers came as a
>>> revelation to me, perhaps as it might have to a Pythagorean apprentice long
>>> ago in Crotona--a reflection of some less accessible reality, through close
>>> study of which one might learn to pass on beyond the difficult given world."
>>>
>>> AtD. p. 749.
>>>
>>> P
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> P.
>>>
>>> On 24 January 2013 22:57, alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Several critical studies examine Pynchon and the American Pragmatists.
>>>>
>>>> I think a good place to turn is to Aristotle. Here in an Introduction
>>>> we see a basic difference in Aristotle from Plato and Socrates, and
>>>> specifically, on Ethics. The wisdom of Aristotle is that he accepts
>>>> the idea that it is wise to examine or explore a topic only so far as
>>>> the topic permits, that there is an exhaustion point, and that in
>>>> Ethics, and in Politics, the topic does not allow for examination as
>>>> it does in other sciences.
>>>>
>>>> Is the application of math to Ethics and Politics Fascist? Maybe.
>>>> Maybe something in that GR....
>>>>
>>>> Is Plato a Fascist?
>>>>
>>>> No, but the math....
>>>>
>>>> The main difference between Plato and Aristotle is this: Plato thought
>>>> ethics was an exact (theoretical) science; Aristotle thought precision
>>>> was extremely difficult in a science such as ethics. Please note that
>>>> "science" is being used in its ancient sense of knowledge in general.
>>>>
>>>> THE PROPER METHOD FOR ETHICS (Bk. I, Sec. 3)
>>>>
>>>>>  From ethics one can expect only as much precision as the subject
>>>> matter allows. This is opposite to Plato's belief, because it does not
>>>> allow for any mathematical exactness. Does this mean, then, that moral
>>>> rules are "conventions," made up or created by humans? No, they are
>>>> natural, but they are not like Plato's immutable forms. Aristotle
>>>> avoids ethical relativism because of his confidence in human reason
>>>> and experience to decide on general courses of action.
>>>>
>>>> Plato approached ethical questions with a formal, abstract approach,
>>>> analyzing each just as he would analyze a math problem. Aristotle,
>>>> though, believed that because of all the human variables found in
>>>> ethics (but not found in the formal sciences), mathematical precision
>>>> was impossible.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/103/aristotle.htm
>>>
>>>