It seems that Spock and Surak were meant to be parodies of stoic philosophers such as Marcus Aurelius. The fact that Surak is listed as a "great mind" alongside Newton and Einstein in the series reflects Roddenberry's high view of stoicism, so perhaps I was too extreme in the judgment of "minstrel character," seeing that he, Surak, and T'Pau were meant to reflect his favorable judgments of Stoicism, but it is still ignorant because
1. Nobody considers the stoics to be legendary thinkers in the real world. Nobody says "Aurelius, Einstein, and Newton."
2. Heavy researchers aren't at all like Spock but he does have a resemblance to people with Aspergers
3. How heavy researchers feel emotions is not at all like stoics. Strongly externally-oriented thinkers feel emotions and see emotional events in a specific way and "like Aurellius" isn't it.
periodically I do see posts from people here on HN who rate Aurelius high.
He is listed in the 100 most influential philosophers of all time http://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/36958/1/12.pd...
Probably nobody, except Douglas Hofstadter, says "Zeno, Einstein, and Newton" but there I can give one example of a notable thinker who might say that, so probably there are some other people in our very populous planet that say "Aurelius, Einstein, and Newton"
Rot mathematics is where it goes wrong. Meta mathematics, abstract, detached from real life, as alot of the academy with its publish pr perish thinking ... that produces pain. Existential voids filled with an exercise that does not help many to move forward optimally.
saying weirdos hate logic is extremely dismissive to a lot of what I would call the human experience.
The same stuff can be taught with soul and purpose If we actually show children how they can apply mathematics to improve and enhance what they’re actually doing whether it is building castles in Lego, Or designing faster toy car, A better school project volcano, etc
I think pointing to a math/physics expert's life story to defend your premise is a bit of a circular reasoning
Feynmann ENJOYED working on puzzles. He started with radios, and fiddled with electricity... and learned hid math as a kid from bools written for „working men“ (which i read and workd through) .. their language is not what you see in textbooks.
He also invented his own notation (talking pre-uni, not physics notation hes also known for) and says he finally switched because he realized he wanted people to understand him, and partially due to conventions.
He played, he didnt get taught, he explored. He learned math to pursue his passion, not vice versa
Not sure what you mean by "rot mathematics".
> Meta mathematics, abstract, detached from real life, as alot of the academy with its publish pr perish thinking ... that produces pain.
Some (including me) would say that the meta and abstract mathematics is most beautiful of all...
> saying weirdos hate logic is extremely dismissive to a lot of what I would call the human experience.
I think you misread the parent comment (although to be clear, I'm not defending it).
The method, the context id wrong.
Its physics and haskell that made me fall inlove. People like me need context, beyond the aesthetic - math TEACHING is lacking, its not a criticism of math itself.
And also thank you for the balanced reply, i was a bit emotional as i wrote that reply. Ill reread and rethink the parent. Maybe i missed something
Why does xkcd have such a strong hatedom? It's not because they love logic, lucidity, and symmetry.
Well, all kinds of people seem to love Sudoku puzzles. And they seem to involve nothing but various kinds of logical reasoning, and the pleasure of achieving things with them.
Some other people certainly found Spock to be a role model in 1968:
https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/6870952/214...