Re: Morally equivalent

[Eduardo Ochs <eduardoochs@gmail.com>]

On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 at 20:34, Michael Heerdegen
<michael_heerdegen@web.de> wrote:
>
> Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com> writes:
>
> > The problem was about the wording, if it turns out Stefan wrote it, then
> > he is not above anybody else.  The problem is that in some important ways,
> > things are not precise.
>
> Nothing in human language is precise.  For me it was precise enough to
> understand the meaning perfectly.
>
> > And users do not like that.
>
> I liked it.  Most people like it much less when Stefan tries to be more
> precise.
>
> Honestly, the only problem with that wording is that it might make
> people wonder whether it is some sort of technical term, which it is not
> really, so it can potentially confuse people.
>
> Michael.

It is "some sort of technical term":

  "A source of tension between Philosophers of Mathematics and
  Mathematicians is the fact that each group feels ignored by the
  other; daily mathematical practice seems barely affected by the
  questions the Philosophers are considering. In this talk I will
  describe an issue that does have an impact on mathematical practice,
  and a philosophical stance on mathematics that is detectable in the
  work of practising mathematicians.

  "No doubt controversially, I will call this issue `morality', but
  the term is not of my coining: there are mathematicians across the
  world who use the word `morally' to great effect in private, and I
  propose that there should be a public theory of what they mean by
  this. The issue arises because proofs, despite being revered as the
  backbone of mathematical truth, often contribute very little to a
  mathematician's understanding. `Moral' considerations, however,
  contribute a great deal. I will first describe what these `moral'
  considerations might be, and why mathematicians have appropriated
  the word `morality' for this notion. However, not all mathematicians
  are concerned with such notions, and I will give a characterisation
  of `moralist' mathematics and `moralist' mathematicians, and discuss
  the development of `morality' in individuals and in mathematics as a
  whole. Fi- nally, I will propose a theory for standardising or
  universalising a system of mathematical morality, and discuss how
  this might help in the development of good mathematics."

  http://eugeniacheng.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/cheng-morality.pdf

[[]] =/,
  Eduardo Ochs
  http://angg.twu.net/#eev